In an open meetings decision issued on July 8, the attorney general's staff concluded that the City of Crittenden did not violate the open meetings law by blocking a citizen from the mayor's Facebook Page.

https://ag.ky.gov/orom/2019/19OMD135.doc

Because the open meetings complainant presented no evidence that a quorum of the members of the city council "met" on Facebook to discuss public business or take action or that members of the council collectively constituting a quorum "met" on Facebook in a series of less than quorum meetings to discuss public business or take action, the attorney general found that no violation of the open meetings law occurred.

There simply was no Facebook "meeting" from which he was excluded.

The attorney general might have taken this opportunity to point out that the open meetings law does not permit Facebook meetings under any circumstances.

In a decisive 2017 open meetings decision, the attorney general's staff flatly rejected the legality of "virtual" meetings. In 17-OMD-165, the staff stated that KRS 61.840 contemplates meeting room conditions that allow effective public observation. The staff observed:

"The requirement of 'meeting room conditions' necessarily entails the presence of an actual meeting room; there is no feasible way to allow for effective public observation of a meeting that is held only by email. The Open Meetings Act makes no provision for 'virtual' meetings; meetings must be held in an actual physical room that complies with KRS 61.840."

https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=42577

The 2017 decision echoed a line of authority dating back to 1977. In a Kentucky Court of Appeals opinion the court held that the law is "designed to require governmental agencies to conduct the public's business in such a way that the deliberations and decisions are accomplished in an atmosphere wherein the public and the media may be present."

https://ag.ky.gov/orom/2017/17OMD165.doc

https://casetext.com/case/jefferson-cty-bd-of-ed-v-courier-journal

No telephonic meetings, no email meetings, and no Facebook meetings. Just say it!

Since the 2017 open meetings decision was issued, KRS 61.826 has been amended to permit video teleconferencing of public meetings to facilitate remote participation under certain circumstances.

https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=47297

It was an unfortunate amendment, in my view, shifting the preference for meetings at which elected or appointed officials are physically present and must face their constituents to a preference for electronic meetings.

But KRS 61.826 still requires *video* teleconferencing to ensure that the public can both see and hear their elected or appointed officials discuss or act on public business. Projecting the Skyped image of a remote participant on a large monitor visible to all member and attendees would presumably suffice.

Facebook offers no such safeguards. It is an impermissible means of conducting a public meeting.

Why leave it to chance? The attorney general's staff needs to make it abundantly clear!!