A footnote to the 2025 Regular Session of the Kentucky General Assembly -- but emblematic of lawmakers’ dismissive attitude toward open meetings and public participation -- on March 11, doctoral student James Orlick hand-delivered an open meetings complaint to Representative James Tipton as chairman of the House Committee on Postsecondary Education. Orlick hand-delivered courtesy copies to Speaker David Osborne and Legislative Research Commission general counsel Greg Woosley.
https://amp.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article301887854.html
https://kentuckylantern.com/briefs/despite-open-meetings-challenge-kent…
Orlick alleged that the committee violated the open meetings law at its March 4 meeting when House Bill 4 — a bill originally titled “An ACT relating to post secondary education” — was voted out of committee, and the meeting was adjourned, before the committee amended the title.
Realizing his error after committee members and most press left the room, Tipton hastily called on the remaining members for a post adjournment vote on the title amendment to “An ACT relating to initiatives regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion.”
This post adjournment action, Orlick alleged, violated KRS 61.810(1), mandating open, public meetings at all times.
https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=52570
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qISCVgojxcQ&t=1s
To date, Orlick has received no response of any kind to his complaint from Tipton or the committee. The law is clear that a public agency must respond, in writing, to an open meetings complaint within three business days. The law is equally clear that the Kentucky General Assembly is subject to the open meetings law.
https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=23054
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5f986190ec1e7d424e58d7f2/5fc51b0…
https://www.ag.ky.gov/Resources/orom/2017/17OMD228.doc
Having received no response to his open meetings complaint, Orlick today filed an open meetings appeal with the Kentucky Attorney General. Instead of a single violation, he now seeks review of two violations: 1) violation of KRS 61.810(1) based on the illegal title amendment vote taken after adjournment on March 4; and 2) violation of KRS 61.846(1) based on the failure of Tipton, the committee, or the Legislative Research Commission to respond to his March 11 open meetings complaint.
The Attorney General has ten days to issue an open meetings decision. Will the committee avail itself of the opportunity to defend its March 4 actions? We should know within three days -- when its response to the appeal is due.
https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=23054
