Annotations for Statute

Action of the school board at a closed meeting could not be ratified at the open public meeting because no vote was taken during an open session and because consensus was not established. Webster County Bd. of Educ. v. Newell, 392 S.W.3d 431, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 31 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).

Adoption of a dress code by a middle school did not violate the Kentucky Open Meetings Act, KRS 61.805 et seq.; the council minutes stated that a second reading of the dress code was conducted and the minutes recorded the action taken, which was all that was required under KRS 61.835. Further, adoption of the dress code by “consensus” was an “action taken” within the meaning of KRS 61.805(3). Blau v. Fort Thomas Pub. Sch. Dist., 401 F.3d 381, 2005 FED App. 0058P, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 1969 (6th Cir. Ky. 2005).

As long as the bylaws of the University of Louisville Foundation, Inc. provide for a membership of a quorum of the Board of Trustees of the University of Louisville, meetings of the University of Louisville Foundation, Inc. are subject to the Open Meetings Law. Courier-Journal & Louisville Times Co. v. University of Louisville Bd. of Trustees, 596 S.W.2d 374, 1979 Ky. App. LEXIS 524 (Ky. Ct. App. 1979).

Clearly, the intent of the legislature in enacting the Open Meetings Act was to ensure that the people of the Commonwealth are given advance notice of meetings conducted by public agencies. E.W. Scripps Co. v. Maysville, 790 S.W.2d 450, 1990 Ky. App. LEXIS 71 (Ky. Ct. App. 1990).

Closed meeting of fiscal court with county attorney to discuss draft of a proposed county ordinance prepared by the county attorney which would permit electioneering near the polls was illegal under the Kentucky Open Meetings Law; however, discussion at meeting of the implied threat of legal action by organized political group was not illegal. Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Courier-Journal & Louisville Times Co., 554 S.W.2d 72, 1977 Ky. LEXIS 480 (Ky. 1977).

Closed meetings of the fiscal court which were held at a luncheon at a boat club and thereafter on a boat to discuss the continuing effort of the county police to have the fraternal order of police recognized as their bargaining agent, the operation of the park and recreation department and the Belle of Louisville, and the potential acquisition of an island were illegal under the Kentucky Open Meetings Law. Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Courier-Journal & Louisville Times Co., 554 S.W.2d 72, 1977 Ky. LEXIS 480 (Ky. 1977).

Court of appeals properly found that the exception to open meetings related to the acquisition of real property did not apply because a board of commissioners went into closed session to discuss its intention to bid on real property offered for sale pursuant to an absolute auction, an auction without reserve; the board's post-auction approvals, while public, were window-dressing because the city was already compelled to complete the purchase or answer a complaint for specific performance. Bd. of Comm'rs of Danville v. Advocate Communs., 527 S.W.3d 803, 2017 Ky. LEXIS 501 (Ky. 2017).

Fiscal court considering zoning plan violated the Open Meetings Act when it improperly considered the record of a previous zoning request; therefore, the proceedings were sufficiently prejudicial to void the action of the fiscal court. Ridenour v. Jessamine County Fiscal Court, 842 S.W.2d 532, 1992 Ky. App. LEXIS 202 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992).

For a meeting to take place within the meaning of the Open Meetings Act, public business must be discussed or action must be taken by the agency. Yeoman v. Commonwealth Health Policy Bd., 983 S.W.2d 459, 1998 Ky. LEXIS 140 (Ky. 1998).

Injunction directing members of fiscal court to obey the Kentucky Open Meetings Act was both overbroad and vague and, thus, erroneously granted. Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Courier-Journal & Louisville Times Co., 554 S.W.2d 72, 1977 Ky. LEXIS 480 (Ky. 1977).

Injunction was proper under KRS 61.848 — even without a showing that petitioners had no adequate remedy at law — when a school board violated the Open Meeting Law by discussing a personnel reorganization plan in closed “executive” meetings; the preparation-for-litigation exception would not apply to mere discussion of whether dismissed administrators might sue the board. Also, the board failed to adhere to KRS 61.815, which requires that, before going into a closed session, a public body must state the exact exception it relies on to go into a closed meeting. Floyd County Bd. of Educ. v. Ratliff, 955 S.W.2d 921, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 145 (Ky. 1997).

Jefferson County Board of Education v. Courier-Journal, 551 S.W.2d 25, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 693 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977); Bell v. Board of Education, 557 S.W.2d 433, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 836 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977); Carter v. Craig, 574 S.W.2d 352, 1978 Ky. App. LEXIS 626 (Ky. Ct. App. 1978); Frankfort Pub. Co. v. Kentucky State University Foundation, Inc., 834 S.W.2d 681, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 103 (Ky. 1992).

Kentucky Open Meetings Act, KRS 61.805 et seq., does not impose upon government agencies the requirement to conduct business only in the most convenient locations at the most convenient times. Knox County v. Hammons, 129 S.W.3d 839, 2004 Ky. LEXIS 74 (Ky. 2004).

Litigation exception to open public meetings was not applicable to the school board’s decision directing legal counsel to pursue a challenge to the petition to recall the board’s nickel tax because it was a “final action” of the board to authorize litigation. Webster County Bd. of Educ. v. Newell, 392 S.W.3d 431, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 31 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).

Public bodies may discuss proposed or pending litigation with their counsel in executive session. Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Courier-Journal & Louisville Times Co., 554 S.W.2d 72, 1977 Ky. LEXIS 480 (Ky. 1977).

Telephone votes of fiscal court which promoted and set the salary of a county employee and which approved the lease by the county of real estate for use of the social services department are void under the Kentucky Open Meetings Law. Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Courier-Journal & Louisville Times Co., 554 S.W.2d 72, 1977 Ky. LEXIS 480 (Ky. 1977).

The Board of Trustees of the University of Kentucky was created by statute, so that the Presidential Search Committee, which was created by formal action of the Board of Trustees, was a public agency and therefore subject to the provisions of this section. Lexington Herald-Leader Co. v. University of Kentucky Presidential Search Committee, 732 S.W.2d 884, 1987 Ky. LEXIS 227 (Ky. 1987).

The State Board of Accountancy is not a quasi-judicial body excluded from the definition of “public agency” found in this section, since otherwise any administrative agency which occasionally held hearings on certain matters could exempt itself from the open meetings statutes and, moreover, there would be no need for the exception to the open meeting requirement found in KRS 61.810(6) (now (1)(f)), because any agency which held any disciplinary hearings would be quasi-judicial; accordingly, the board violated the open meeting laws by conducting its final deliberations on the question of whether to censure an accountant in a closed session. Stinson v. State Bd. of Accountancy, 625 S.W.2d 589, 1981 Ky. App. LEXIS 304 (Ky. Ct. App. 1981).

Vote was not rendered unnecessary at the school board meeting under KRS 61.805 because it was not possible to determine if a consensus or collective decision was made. Webster County Bd. of Educ. v. Newell, 392 S.W.3d 431, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 31 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).

While the coverage of the Open Meetings Act, KRS 61.800, was broad enough to include a police captain’s termination hearing, the police captain did not follow the procedures in KRS 61.846 and 61.848, and so was not entitled to relief. Howard v. City of Independence, 199 S.W.3d 741, 2005 Ky. App. LEXIS 230 (Ky. Ct. App. 2005), abrogated in part, Pearce v. Univ. of Louisville, 2011 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 998 (Ky. Ct. App. Nov. 18, 2011).