Open records violations may be the least of Marshall County Fiscal Court members' worries.

This article from WPSD Local 6 describes a series of texts and emails exchanged by the county judge and two of the three county commissioners concerning a proposed Second Amendment Sanctuary City ordinance that "would have made it a crime in Marshall County to enforce any federal or state law regarding firearms considered an 'unlawful act' by the county."

Local 6 relates that it has filed an appeal with the Kentucky Attorney General concerning the fiscal court's failure to issue a timely response to its open records requests for records relating to the proposed ordinance as well as the withholding of some records without legal justification.

The station also expresses concern about the fact that some of the records were not in the custody of the fiscal court's records custodian.

Much more troubling is the disclosure that a quorum of the Marshall County Fiscal Court members engaged in secret discussions of the proposed ordinance by text and email.

Reporter Shammaria Morrison describes the exchanges:

"Days before the fiscal court meeting, text messages show Neal discussing the Second Amendment sanctuary ordinance with Commissioners Monti Collins and Justin Lamb.

"On Dec. 14, Neal texts Lamb saying, 'We should make it an ordinance and give it real teeth.'

"Neal also mentions Bill 430, which was pre-filed in the Kentucky State Legislature. The proposed bill is by state Sen. Danny Carroll of Paducah regarding sanctuary policies.

"Neal tells Lamb, 'I don't trust the bill at all' in regards to sanctuary policies in general.

"Lamb says, 'I'm all in for an ordinance. The more we can do to protect the rights of our citizens the better off we are.'

"Dec. 16, the Monday before the first reading, Neal emailed all three county commissioners and the county attorney.

"In those messages, Neal says he's waiting on a copy of a revised ordinance from a man he describes as a constitutional attorney, Lexington lawyer Kent Masterson Brown.

"On Dec. 17, the day of the first reading, Neal texts Lamb, 'Jason (County Attorney Jason Darnall) took out all amendments that my constitutional attorney put in.'

"Lamb responds, 'Just now checked my email. He gutted the whole ordinance...'

"Neal writes 'Yes! My gloves are off."

"The text thread does not have an exact time stamp showing when those messages were sent on Dec. 17. We do know Darnall offered to provide Neal with a revised version of the ordinance that aligned with current legal statues after the 9:30 a.m. fiscal court meeting."

The mandate of the open meetings law is found at KRS 61.810(1). It states:

All meetings of a quorum of the members of any public agency at which any public business is discussed or at which any action is taken by the agency, shall be public meetings, open to the public at all times.

This provision implements the legislative statement of policy, codified at KRS 61.800, which declares that "the formation of public policy is public business and shall not be conducted in secret . . . ." The law demonstrates a commitment to "open government openly arrived at."

The Kentucky Supreme Court has recognized that the open meetings law "prohibits a quorum from discussing public business in private or meeting in numbers less than a quorum for the express purpose of avoiding the open meeting requirement of the Act."

Public agency action that violates the laws may be voided by the court.

The Marshall County ordinance is, according to the article, on hold.

If challenged, these officials are likely to raise the spurious defense that their purpose in secretly discussing public business by email and text was not to avoid the open meetings law.

But the law is abundantly clear on this point, and these officials have had ample opportunity to educate themselves on their duties under these laws.

I can conceive of no plausible defense to their actions.