Sources confirmed to The Martin Chronicles over the weekend that another complaint has been sent to the Villa Hills Ethics Board. We have since obtained a copy of the complaint and it comes with a different twist. The complaint was not only sent to the ethics board. The complaint is against the ethics board.
Specifically, the complaint asserts that the ethics board committed multiple violations of Kentucky’s Open Meeting Statutes relating to their 11/30 meeting notice and the conduct of the meeting itself. Sources in the Attorney General’s office say that of all the city boards and committees, the expectation is that the ethics board should strictly adhere to state statutes and local ordinances. They are the one local board that passes judgment on the actions of others. It is reasonable that they would bend over backwards to avoid even the slightest hint of impropriety. That all makes perfect sense.
The ethics board notice of their 11/30 session states that they would be holding a “closed door” meeting and gives the date and time of the meeting. Insufficient detail was in the notice to satisfy the requirements of Kentucky Open Meetings Statutes. Our AG source also suggests that by posting the notice of a “closed door” meeting, the ethics board was discouraging public participation. While that may have been unintentional, it was still also improper.
The Martin Chronicles has already given you a preliminary report on the meeting itself. Given the fact that the meeting notice did not meet the statutory requirements, the assembly was an improper one from the jump. The very second the meeting was called to order they had a bigger problem. The longer the ethics board sat in chambers and discussed issues relative to the work of their board, they further compounded that problem.
The best course of action that night would have been for the ethics board to exit the building as if it was on fire. Instead, they stubbornly pressed on. It was the equivalent of a man who noticed a tiny drop of ranch dressing on his favorite tie and continued to rub it until the stain was the size of a silver dollar.
It gets even worse. We have learned that the complainant advised the board prior to their gathering that their meeting notice was improper. Then, after the board called their meeting to order, the complainant once again warned the members that they were in violation of the open meetings statutes. All the warnings were ignored.
The Martin Chronicles is still trying to confirm that a board member phoned the city attorney during the meeting. We are told that is when the board finally decided to pull the plug on the session. But by then the damage was done.
The ethics board has not had to deal with a complaint for more than ten years. So it is logical to think that they may be a bit “rusty”. But that does not provide an excuse. If anything, it is an even more compelling reason why they should have gone the extra mile confirming they were on solid legal ground before even posting a meeting notice.
They are the ethics board after all.
