Citizen Portal
Sign In

Committee defers optometric board’s contract for outside counsel, orders attorney general to appear

Kentucky General Assembly Contracts Review Committee · April 13, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Kentucky Board of Optometric Examiners requested a personal‑service contract for legal counsel; legislators said state statute requires the attorney general to provide counsel and moved to defer the contract for one month and summon the attorney general. The committee voted to defer.

The contracts review committee voted to defer a proposed personal‑service contract by the Kentucky Board of Optometric Examiners for outside legal counsel and ordered that the attorney general appear at the committee’s next meeting to resolve whether the board may contract for legal services.

Dr. Marybeth Morris, who identified herself as the board’s president, described a series of complex regulatory matters that “require careful review” and said the board had been advised by the public protection cabinet that it lacked staff resources. The board asked for authority to retain outside counsel for administrative, disciplinary and statutory work.

Christy LeMay, the board’s executive director, said she had approached the attorney general’s office but had received only verbal responses and no written guidance. Several legislators cited an attorney‑general opinion and a statutory provision that “the attorney general shall render … legal services” to boards under the chapter, and argued the General Assembly could not approve a contract that conflicts with statute.

Senator Thomas moved to defer the contract for one month and to summon the attorney general to appear. ‘‘The Board of Optometric Examiners should not be put in an impasse where they can’t continue their work,’’ Senator Thomas said, while also emphasizing the committee cannot direct a violation of statute.

Why it matters: The dispute raises a statutory question about which state office is responsible for providing legal counsel to boards and whether the board can lawfully hire outside counsel absent statutory change. Board officials warned that lack of counsel risks litigation, delay or invalidated actions.

What’s next: The committee deferred the matter and directed staff to request the attorney general appear at the committee’s next meeting in May to resolve whether the board can contract for the services requested.