Could the Kentucky Parole Board chair set rotating panel assignments without a board vote?

Plain-English summary

Kentucky's Attorney General concluded in 2013 that the Parole Board chair could not unilaterally establish a policy for rotating members among panels. Although the statute let the chair determine the board's organization, the AG treated a standing assignment schedule as a policy or procedural matter. Those matters required a quorum and formal action by the full board.

The opinion left room for the board to delegate implementation. Once the board decided on a rotating-assignment policy, it could authorize the chair to carry out the schedule. The opinion addressed who had to adopt the policy, not which particular rotation would be best.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2013. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Who had to approve a rotating Parole Board panel schedule?

The AG said the full board had to act because a recurring assignment schedule was a policy or procedural matter under KRS 439.320(4).

Could the board let its chair administer the rotation afterward?

Yes. The opinion said the board could delegate authority to implement an assignment schedule to the chair if it chose.

Background and statutory framework

The Parole Board chair asked whether he could implement rotating panel assignments by himself. The AG quoted KRS 439.320(4): the chair determined the board's organization, while five members constituted a quorum for policy and procedural matters. It read panel-assignment rules as the latter and required board action before implementation.

Citations and references

Statute: KRS 439.320(4).

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.ky.gov/Resources/Opinions/Pages/Opinions.aspx
• Original Word document: https://www.ag.ky.gov/Resources/Opinions/Opinions/OAG13-007.doc

Original opinion text

OAG 13-007

May 24, 2013

Subject: Whether the Chairperson of the Kentucky Parole Board may unilaterally implement a rotating schedule of panel assignments for Parole Board members

Requested by: Larry D. Chandler,

Chairperson, Kentucky Parole Board

Written by: Matt James

Syllabus: Policies and procedures for Parole Board assignments require action by the full Parole Board

Statutes construed: KRS 439.320

Opinion of the Attorney General

Larry D. Chandler, Chairperson of the Kentucky Parole Board, has requested an opinion of this office on whether the Chairperson may unilaterally implement a schedule of rotating assignments to parole board panels, or whether the action of the full Parole Board is required to implement such a schedule. We advise that action of the full Parole Board is necessary to determine policies and procedures for assignments to Parole Board panels.

KRS 439.320(4) provides that “the organization of the board shall be determined by the chairperson and shall be consistent with administrative regulations promulgated pursuant to KRS 439.340. For policy and procedural matters, five (5) members shall constitute a quorum.” We are aware of no authority interpreting KRS 439.320(4) as it relates to the procedure for determining assignments to Parole Board panels, and are left with only the plain language of the statute. The statute says that “for policy and procedural matters, five (5) members shall constitute a quorum.” We interpret this language to mean that a quorum and formal board action is necessary for policy and procedural matters. While KRS 439.320(4) does provide that “the organization of the board shall be determined by the chairperson,” determining a policy or procedure for assignments to Parole Board panels would seem to be a policy or procedural matter. Accordingly we advise that action of the full Parole Board is necessary to implement such a policy. The Parole Board may of course delegate the authority to implement a schedule of rotating assignments to the Chairperson if it sees fit.

JACK CONWAY

ATTORNEY GENERAL

Matt James

Assistant Attorney General