The attorney general will not address a violation of the
Open Meetings Act that is anticipated but has not occurred, according to an
August 8 opinion.
The opinion concerned an appeal by Michael Murphy in regard to the
Glencoe City Council’s response to his July 1, 2014, written complaint, which
alleged violation of the Open Meetings Act based on the council’s actions
regarding non-agenda topics.
The attorney general found that the city had violated
certain provisions of the act by “discussing and acting on non-agenda topics” at
a June 16 special meeting.
According to the opinion, the council did not dispute the
allegation and agreed to Murphy’s proposed remedy of conducting all of its
special meetings and committee meetings “strictly in accordance” with the
provisions of the relevant Kentucky statutes.
However, the attorney general cannot address potential
violations of the act.
While Murphy may have expressed concern about the
possibility of future violations, his proper remedy is to submit a complaint to
the council’s presiding officer if he questions whether a violation has
occurred and pursue an appeal if necessary, according to the opinion.
“The Attorney General cannot prospectively address
violations of the Open Meetings Act that a complainant anticipates but that
have not occurred,” the opinion stated.
No comments:
Post a Comment