Request By:
[NO REQUESTBY IN ORIGINAL]
Opinion
Opinion By: CHRIS GORMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL; Thomas R. Emerson, Assistant Attorney General
OPEN MEETINGS DECISION
This matter comes to the Attorney General as an appeal by Ed Meredith concerning his letter to the Grayson County Board of Education. The letter in part dealt with activities of the school board and how meetings of the school board were conducted. Mr. Meredith maintains that the school board has not responded in writing to his written complaint.
In a letter to Danny Allen Crawford, Chairman of the Grayson County Board of Education, dated May 26, 1994, Mr. Meredith in part raised several questions concerning the holding of school board meetings.
In his letter of appeal to the Attorney General, received July 13, 1994, Mr. Meredith states that as of July 12, 1994, he had not received a response from the school board.
The undersigned, in an attempt to learn more about the matter, called the school system's office on July 20, 1994, and was advised that the system was closed until July 25, 1994. Neither the superintendent nor any other school system official was available to talk with the undersigned until July 25, 1994.
KRS 61.846(1) provides in part as follows relative to a complaint under the Open Meetings Act and the response by the public agency:
The person shall submit a written complaint to the presiding officer of the public agency suspected of the violation of KRS 61.805 to 61.850. The complaint shall state the circumstances which constitute an alleged violation of KRS 61.805 to 61.850 and shall state what the public agency should do to remedy the alleged violation. The public agency shall determine within three (3) days, excepting Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays, after the receipt of the complaint whether to remedy the alleged violation pursuant to the complaint and shall notify in writing the person making the complaint, within the three (3) day period, of its decision.
The Grayson County Board of Education is obviously a public agency (KRS 61.805(2)(c)) and thus subject to the terms and provisions of the Open Meetings Act (KRS 61.805 to KRS 61.850).
The letter of complaint submitted by Mr. Meredith, dated May 26, 1994, was sufficient under KRS 61.846(1) to invoke and bring into play the terms and provisions of the Open Meetings Act.
KRS 61.846(1) mandates that a school board respond in writing within three business days after receipt of the complaint to the person submitting the complaint against such a public agency. Failure to do so constitutes a violation of the Open Meetings Act. The school board should immediately respond in writing to Mr. Meredith relative to his complaints of May 26, 1994, addressed to Danny Allen Crawford, Chairman of the Grayson County Board of Education.
The Grayson County Board of Education may challenge this decision by filing an appeal with the appropriate circuit court within thirty days from the date of this decision. See KRS 61.846(4)(a) and KRS 61.848. Pursuant to KRS 61.846(5), the Attorney General must be notified of any action filed in the circuit court, but he shall not be named as a party in that action or in any subsequent proceedings under the Open Meetings Act.