24-OMD-026
February 6, 2024
In re: Douglas Phelps/City of London
Summary: Because the Open Meetings Act (“the Act”) does not entitle
any member of the public to be heard at a public meeting, the City of
London (“the City”) did not violate the Act when it failed to respond to a
request by a member of the public asking to be heard.
Open Meetings Decision
On January 18, 2023, Douglas Phelps (“the Appellant”) submitted a complaint
to the Mayor of the City, claiming he never received a response to his earlier requests
to be placed on the agenda and be heard at city council meetings. In a timely response,
the City Attorney responded on behalf of the City and denied that the Appellant had
stated a cognizable violation of the Act.1
The purpose of the Act “is that the formation of public policy is public business
and shall not be conducted in secret.” KRS 61.800. Accordingly, all discussions of
public business by a quorum of a public agency must occur at a meeting that is open
to the public, KRS 61.810, and no condition of attendance can be implemented to deny
the public’s access to the meeting, KRS 61.840. However, while the public has a right
to attend any public meeting, the Act does not give any member of the public a right
to be heard by the public agency2 or to choose which matters are placed on the agenda.
See, e.g., 19-OMD-135; 00-OMD-169; 95-OMD-99. Further, because the Act does not
require a public agency to place the public’s preferred topics on the agenda, the Act
also does not require a public agency to respond to such a request. Rather, only when
a person submits a complaint alleging the public agency has violated the Act is the
agency required to issue a written response to the complainant. KRS 61.846(1). Here,
the City was not required to allow the Appellant to speak at a city council meeting or
1
The Appellant claims he never received a response from the Mayor or the City Clerk. However,
the City Attorney’s response was clearly rendered on behalf of the City.
2
Although not part of the Act, KRS 160.270(2) requires local boards of education to allow at least
15 minutes of public comment at each regular meeting. No similar statute applies to any other public
agency.place his preferred topic on the agenda. Therefore, it did not violate the Act by not
responding to his requests.
A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating an action in the
appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.846(4)(a). The Attorney General shall
be notified of any action in circuit court, but shall not be named as a party in that
action or in any subsequent proceedings. The Attorney General will accept notice of
the complaint emailed to OAGAppeals@ky.gov.
Russell Coleman
Attorney General
/s/ Marc Manley
Marc Manley
Assistant Attorney General
#024
Distributed to:
Douglas Phelps
Larry Bryson
Randall Weddle