Opinion
Opinion By: Jack Conway, Attorney General; Michelle D. Harrison, Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Decision
The question presented in this appeal is whether the Graves County School Board violated the Kentucky Open Records Act in the disposition of Richard Jackson's February 4, 2014, request for "the minutes of all the Graves County Board [meetings] for the month of January, 2014 also including the agenda minutes. Please be sure and include the Board meeting in Louisville." On February 5, 2014, Administrative Assistant Ann Clapp, Graves County Schools, provided Mr. Jackson with minutes from the Board meetings held on January 8, 2014, and January 16, 2014. Ms. Clapp advised that a "scheduled meeting" was not held in Louisville, "only KSBA convention sessions where board members attended them individually." 1 Mr. Jackson subsequently initiated this appeal by letter dated February 13, 2014, explaining that he "talked to a citizen that attended the Graves County Board meeting on Wednesday, January 8, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. I was told by the person that the discussion of school business lasted about ninety (90) minutes before being adjourned. " According to Mr. Jackson, five members of the Board were present "along with several school administrative personnel and the Board Attorney. I requested minutes of that meeting."
Upon receiving notification of Mr. Jackson's appeal from this office, David L. Hargrove, Board Attorney, responded on behalf of his client. Mr. Hargrove advised that "the records supplied to Mr. Jackson are the records that were kept by the secretary of the minutes of that particular meeting. No other records exist." 2 Mr. Hargrove further explained that the Board holds a special meeting "each month on the Wednesday prior to the following week's regularly scheduled Thursday Board meeting in order to set the agenda for the regular monthly meeting." The Board plans the agenda but "discussion of the items on the agenda occurs at the regularly scheduled board meeting, " he continued, "for which there are corresponding board minutes. Other than the setting of the agenda, no other discussions are held nor any action taken. The agenda is approved by vote at the regular board meeting. That is reflected in Item 177 of the agenda of the special meeting. "
Resolution of the instant appeal turns on the application of KRS 61.835, 3 pursuant to which:
The minutes of action taken at every meeting of any such public agency, setting forth an accurate record of votes and actions at such meetings, shall be promptly recorded and such records shall be open to public inspection at reasonable times no later than immediately following the next meeting of the body.
Appeals arising exclusively under KRS 61.835 "are rare," presumably because the provision is "clear on its face." 04-OMD-182, p. 6. Addressing the requirements of KRS 61.835 as applied to ad-hoc committees serving a strictly advisory function, the Attorney General determined that minutes must be maintained, even if those minutes reflect only that the public agency convened, approved the minutes of the last meeting, and adjourned. See 00-OMD-96; 95-OMD-64. In other words:
KRS 61.835 sets forth the minimal requirements pertaining to the keeping of the minutes of a public agency. . . . If at the meeting in question nothing was decided or acted upon or voted upon the minutes could, under KRS 61.835, consist of nothing more than a record of the actions which opened and adjourned the meeting. This material would be subject to public inspection. While some agencies may by their own regulations require more thorough minutes, the Open Meetings Act requires only what is set forth in KRS 61.835 relative to the minutes.
95-OMD-64, p. 4 (emphasis added).
Early on, the Attorney General construed this provision, which has remained intact since being enacted in 1974, as requiring the minutes of a meeting held by a public agency to reflect only "the formal actions taken and the votes cast by the members," and not requiring the minutes of the meeting "to summarize the discussion or record what any of the members said." OAG 81-387, p. 2. In so holding, this office relied upon the express language of the statute as well as "the foremost authority on parliamentary procedure, Roberts' Rules of Order, Newly Revised, Scott Foresman and Company, § 47, pp. 389-391. [(1970) indicating] that minutes should contain mainly a record of what was done at the meeting, not what was said by the members." Id., p. 1. On that basis, the Attorney General concluded that "anything more than [a record of votes and actions] is a matter of parliamentary procedure and [falls within] the discretion of the public body." Id.
Shortly thereafter, the Attorney General clarified this position as to the necessity of recording the name of the person who makes or seconds a motion:
The customary practice in parliamentary bodies is to record in the minutes the name of the person who makes or seconds a motion, but such is not required by the statute. It is required, however, that the minutes show how each member voted or if he abstained. If the vote was unanimous it is sufficient to so state in the minutes.
OAG 82-412, p. 2. In OAG 91-196, the Attorney General reaffirmed this principle, holding that KRS 61.835 requires "that the minutes of the meeting show how each member voted or if he abstained except, if the vote was unanimous, it is sufficient to so state in the minutes. " Id., p. 2.
Given that Mr. Jackson received a copy of the minutes from the Board's January 8, 2014, meeting (attached to his letter of appeal), and he confirmed on appeal that he "requested the minutes of that meeting," his only complaint in this context is apparently that "the discussions held were not mentioned at all." 4 However, Item 177 of those minutes, entitled, "Plan Agenda for January 16, 2014 Meeting," specifies that "Board members planned the agenda for the upcoming meeting to be held on January 16, 2014. No action was taken." Under Item 178, entitled "Adjourn, " the five members who voted "Aye" in response to a motion that was made by a Board member to adjourn the meeting, and seconded by a different Board member, are named in accordance with decisions construing KRS 61.835. Simply put, nothing else is required.
As indicated above, a public agency is not statutorily required "to summarize the discussion or record what any of the members said." OAG 81-387, p. 2; 05-OMD-188. Whether to include such information was entirely in the discretion of the Board. Inasmuch as the Board complied with KRS 61.835 by promptly recording minutes of its January 8 meeting, "setting forth an accurate record of votes and actions" taken, and complied with KRS 61.872 by making those minutes available in response to Mr. Jackson's February 4, 2014, request, along with minutes of its January 16, meeting, this office has no basis upon which to find that the Board violated the Open Records Act or KRS 61.835.
A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating action in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882. Pursuant to KRS 61.880(3), 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 proceeding.
Distributed to:
Richard JacksonAnn ClappKim HarrisonDavid L. Hargrove
Footnotes
Footnotes