Request By:
Mr. Frank Peluso
Clerk
City of Newport
Courthouse
Fourth and York Streets
Newport, Kentucky 41071
Opinion
Opinion By: Steven L. Beshear, Attorney General; Carl Miller, Assistant Attorney General
Steve Saunders, Mike Whitehead and Terry Bailey have appealed to the Attorney General under KRS 61.880 the denial of inspection of certain public records in your custody as Clerk of the City of Newport. The records in question are described as "all Code Enforcement records between January, 1979 and the present time." The letter of appeal to the Attorney General narrates a series of events beginning on October 6, 1980 and continuing up to November 12, 1980 when it is alleged you finally denied the request to inspect the records and made a tape recording of your denial. We do not believe it is necessary to include in this opinion a verbatim copy of the account of the requesters' efforts to inspect the records and the various responses made by you and other public officials. We think it will be sufficient to cite the following allegations of fact.
The requesters state that Terry Bailey was allowed to begin reviewing the Code Enforcement files on October 28, 1980; that after lunch on that day Mr. Bailey was told he would have to fill out a public records inspection request form as required by the Newport City Clerk's Office; Mr. Bailey filled out the form requesting that he and Mike Whitehead be allowed to view the described records; that on October 31, 1980 you responded that the requesters would be allowed to review records one day a month and to examine two month's worth of records at a time.
The question on this appeal is whether your alleged response is in conformity with the requirements of the Open Records Law, KRS 61.870-61.884. No question has been raised as to whether the described records are public records or whether they fall within one of the exceptions provided by KRS 61.878. Nor has the question been raised as to whether you are the official custodian of the records, and, for the purpose of this opinion we assume that you are.
OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
The requesters on this appeal are representatives of the Newport Citizens Advisory Council, of which the letter of appeal states: "It is the officially designated citizen participation body of the City of Newport and is recognized as such by the Regional Office of HUD in Louisville." We consider this fact to be immaterial because under the Open Records Law all persons have the same standing to inspect public records and, when making the request to inspect records, they do not have to state any reason or purpose for making the inspection. KRS 61.872(2) provides:
"Any person shall have the right to inspect public records during the regular office hours of the public agency. The official custodian may require written application describing the records to be inspected."
It is our opinion that your response to the requesters that they would be allowed to review records one day a month and "two months worth of records at a time" placed an unreasonable and illegal restriction upon the right of the requesters to inspect the records. That restriction would result in the requesters having to take more than a year to review the described records.
KRS 61.880(4) provides as follows:
"In the event a person feels the intent of KRS 61.870 to 61.884 is being subverted by an agency short of denial of inspection, including but not limited to the imposition of excessive fees or the misdirection of the applicant, the person may complain in writing to the Attorney General and the complaint shall be subject to the same adjudicatory process as if the records had been denied."
Upon the facts stated, we believe that the response restricting the inspection of the records as described above constitutes a subversion of the intent of the Open Records Law and that the requesters are entitled to inspect all of the described records immediately and continuously until the inspection is completed to their satisfaction.
As required by KRS 61.880(2) a copy of this opinion is being sent to the requesters. KRS 61.880(5) provides as follows:
"If the Attorney General upholds, in whole or in part, the request for inspection, the public agency involved may institute proceedings within 30 days for injunctive or declaratory relief in the circuit court of the district where the public record is maintained. If the Attorney General disallows the request or if the public agency continues to withhold the record notwithstanding the opinion of the Attorney General, the persons seeking disclosure may institute such proceedings."