The Attorney General just announced that all county judge-executives, mayors, school superintendents, public university presidents, and their legal counsel are required to comply with updated open records and open meetings law (as of July 15).
From the OAG:
On July 15, 2008, the open meetings law was amended to permit public agencies to send notice of special meetings to agency members and media organizations by email if the members or media organizations have filed a written request with the agency indicating a preference for email notification.
Public officials who receives the open meetings and open records update from the Attorney General are required by law to distribute the information to all elected and appointed officials and members within the county, city, school district or university they represent, and to certify compliance with the Attorney General. The update will reach several thousand state and local officials and promote compliance with the open records and open meetings law in Kentucky.
This is a great thing, folks, and is a step in the right direction for more transparency. If you’re frustrated with your government or a government agency, get a media outlet to file open records requests.
12 responses so far ↓
1 Yellow Dog // Jul 30, 2008 at 1:50 pm
“Get a media outlet to file”?!?!?
The Open Records and Open Meetings Laws are for CITIZENS, not media outlets.
The rights of media outlets under those laws derive from their status as representatives of the public.
Any citizen can walk into a courthouse and demand meeting minutes, copies of contracts, or any other document under the Open Records Law – no media outlet required.
Any citizen can attend any non-exempt meeting of any public body with needing permission from anyone.
As a former reporter, I think it’s high time people stopped depending on media outlets to exercise rights those citizens should be exercising themselves.
2 jake // Jul 30, 2008 at 1:53 pm
You’re overreacting just a bit.
I mean in the sense that media outlets can amplify investigations and certain situations. A la UofL and the Robert Felner scandal.
3 BHG // Jul 30, 2008 at 2:03 pm
I was also going to remind citizens that they can file open records requests themselves but Yellow Dog beat me to it. And everyone should also know that if they feel the public agency has wrongly turned them down, they can appeal to the AG’s office.
The other point I wanted to make was about the intro, which leads the reader to think that these official are only just now required to follow open records/open meetings law. That’s not the case — the AG is just letting everyone know that the laws were updated to allow meeting notices by email (a great time and money saver for agencies and convenient for the rest of us, too), and took the opportunity to remind everyone to follow the rest of the law, too.
4 BHG // Jul 30, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Let me clarify my prior post – these officials were required to follow existing open records laws before July 15th.
5 jake // Jul 30, 2008 at 2:08 pm
BHG: That’s what this post was about…? Hence me quoting from the AG’s press release with the following:
the open meetings law was amended to permit public agencies to send notice of special meetings to agency members and media organizations by email if the members or media organizations have filed a written request with the agency indicating a preference for email notification.
6 Yellow Dog // Jul 30, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Exactly, BHG. They’ve actually been required to do so since the laws were first passed, at least 35 years ago.
The real story here is that local officials and agencies have been blatantly violating these laws for years and getting away with it.
Citizens interested in challenging obstructionist officials should get a copy of this announcement from the AG and keep it handy to brandish in their faces.
Remind them, too, of the punishment for violating these laws – fairly substantial fines for each instance, I believe.
7 BHG // Jul 30, 2008 at 2:22 pm
I admit, Jake, I could’ve been clearer in my post about how you could’ve been clearer in yours. Long day. Thanks for the reminder of open records overall — and I agree with you that the new media outlets can be a good place for people to turn when they feel like they aren’t getting anywhere with their initial requests/complaints. Great job on the U of L stuff, btw.
8 jake // Jul 30, 2008 at 2:27 pm
I’m not trying to nitpick. Just wanted to point out that if you know something is corrupt or questionable, there’s very little you can do as an individual. But you can make a lot of noise if you get a media outlet to pay attention. Be it a television station, blog, radio show or a newspaper (with the exception of Louisville, of course).
9 Not My Given Name // Jul 30, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Jake, oh if only your 2:27 comment was true. The media will ignore things that are corrupt and/or questionable if that information conflicts with their agenda.
The entire Ernie Fletcher controversy is a prime example. The media did nothing to investigate conflicts of interest among members of the grand jury that issued the indictments, personal motives of prominent players in the case (Doug Doerting for one), or evidence that would have been exculpatory in the court of public opinion. If the public knew the real story behind the investigation, the personal and professional conflicts of interest among the people who officially charged the governor and members of his administration with crimes, and the court filings that told a completely different story than the Stumbo AG’s office was telling, things may have turned out differently last fall. The media had access to all this information and the resources to investigate, but chose not to. The H-L and C-J wanted Fletcher out of office as badly as Stumbo and Luallen did.
10 jake // Jul 30, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Did you even READ my comments?
I’ve made it very clear that some mainstream media outlets are completely worthless.
11 Not My Given Name // Jul 30, 2008 at 9:02 pm
In this case, not SOME mainstream media. ALL mainstream media. The only place I read about the Doerting deposition in which he declared that the goal of the Fletcher administration in the Transportation Cabinet was to END the practice of pre-selection of candidates, as had been done in years past, was in the Paducah Sun.
12 wc // Jul 31, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Jake is so right, given the Robert Felner scandal. Folks at UofL were scared for 5 years to ask the Open Records Officer at UofL for any sort of records that would prove that Felner was corrupting the college because 1) no one listens to individuals, and 2) the Open Records Officer said that Felner would be permitted to ask WHO asked for those records. If Felner knew a particular professor asked for a record, then that professor was attacked mercilessly. I know this because it happened to me.
So, thank god for blogs and even the C-J for asking for records ordinary citizens are afraid to ask for.
Leave a Comment