Request By:
Honorable Robert E. Taylor
P.O. Box 366
Franklin, Kentucky 42134
Opinion
Opinion By: David L. Armstrong, Attorney General; By: Cicely D. Jaracz, Assistant Attorney General
As attorney for the Franklin Simpson Planning and Zoning Commission, you have requested an opinion pertaining to the Kentucky Open Meetings law, KRS 61.805 et seq. Specifically, you indicate that it was your understanding that the Commission, after holding a public hearing on rezoning, could go into closed session to discuss the matter and then come back into open meeting to announce its decision. You felt that this fell under the quasi-judicial exception to the Open Meetings law, KRS 61.805(2).
At such a meeting held April 3, 1984, a local attorney challenged the Commission's right to go into closed session. You therefore requested this opinion as to whether or not the closed session at the above meeting was proper under the Open Meetings law.
The Commission is a "public agency" as defined by KRS 61.805(2) and is thus subject to the Open Meetings law. However, KRS 61.805(2) exempts judicial or quasi-judicial bodies from the provisions of the Open Meetings law.
As we stated in OAG 83-446, whether a public agency is subject to the Open Meetings law or exempt as a quasi-judicial body is dependent upon its function at the time. To be exempt as a quasi-judicial body, an agency must make determinations which affect substantial rights, exercise discretion, and require notice and hearing. See OAG 83-446, 83-259.
KRS 100.211(1) requires the planning commission, after giving notice, to hold at least one public hearing and then make recommendations to the proper legislative bodies. OAG 79-114 indicates that the hearing is to be of a "trial-type" with witness testimony under oath, preparation of a transcript from the proceedings, and entry of an order and findings of fact. The Commission thereby acts as a quasi-judicial body in holding a public hearing on rezoning under KRS 100.211(1), as it makes determinations which affect property rights, uses discretion in determining whether to rezone, and is required by statute to give notice and a hearing. As a quasi-judicial body when functioning under KRS 100.211(1), the Commission is not subject to the Open Meetings law.
It is therefore the opinion of the Attorney General that the Commission was acting as a quasi-judicial body when it went into closed session to discuss and reach a decision following a public hearing on rezoning, held pursuant to KRS 100.211(1). As a quasi-judicial body, the Commission was not subject to and therefore did not violate the Open Meetings law.