Skip to main content

Opinion

Opinion By: Jack Conway, Attorney General; Amye L. Bensenhaver, Assistant Attorney General

Open Meetings Decision

This matter having been presented to the Attorney General in an open meetings appeal, and the Attorney General being sufficiently advised, we find that the allegations contained in Leonard Wilson's October 18, 2010, complaint to the Jeffersonville City Commission do not state a violation of "the provisions of KRS 61.805 to 61.850," and are therefore not appropriate for review under the Open Meetings Act. Mr. Wilson alleged that the Commission violated the Act "after last month's meeting" when it hired a chauffeur to drive two city employees who failed a drug test. In a timely written response, the City refuted these allegations and, in subsequent correspondence, properly noted that the issue Mr. Wilson attempts to raise "is not an issue regarding open meeting as envisioned by KRS 61.805 to 61.850." We agree.

At page 5 of 02-OMD-200, this office determined that violations of the Open Meetings Act "are predicated upon, for example, an agency's failure to give adequate notice of its special meetings, as required by KRS 61.823(2), (3), and (4)(a) and (b), its decision to conduct a closed session that is not authorized by KRS 61.810(1)(a) through (m), its failure to observe the requirements for conducting a closed session codified at KRS 61.815, or its failure to record minutes in contravention of KRS 61.835." "Such violations," we concluded, "are predicated upon how [the agency] conducts its meetings . . . ." Id. 1 We find that 02-OMD-200, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference, is dispositive of this appeal. Mr. Wilson's allegations relate to action purportedly taken after the Commission's meeting, and do not state a violation of the Open Meetings Act.

A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating action in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.846(4)(a). The Attorney General should be notified of any action in circuit court, but should not be named as a party in that action or in any subsequent proceedings.

Leonard WilsonAnthony Henderson, MayorLeah Hawkins

Footnotes

Footnotes

1 Clearly, public agencies may improperly act outside the confines of a public meeting by, for example, meeting privately to take secret action, but no allegation is made in this regard.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

LLM Summary
The decision concludes that the allegations made by Leonard Wilson against the Jeffersonville City Commission do not constitute a violation of the Open Meetings Act because they pertain to actions taken after the Commission's meeting. The decision references 02-OMD-200 to affirm that violations of the Act are specifically related to how meetings are conducted, such as giving proper notice, conducting authorized closed sessions, and recording minutes. Since Wilson's complaint did not relate to these aspects, it was not considered appropriate for review under the Open Meetings Act.
Disclaimer:
The Sunshine Law Library is not exhaustive and may contain errors from source documents or the import process. Nothing on this website should be taken as legal advice. It is always best to consult with primary sources and appropriate counsel before taking any action.
Requested By:
Leonard Wilson
Agency:
Jeffersonville City Commission
Type:
Open Meetings Decision
Lexis Citation:
2010 Ky. AG LEXIS 227
Cites:
Neighbors

Support Our Work

The Coalition needs your help in safeguarding Kentuckian's right to know about their government.