Request By:
Ms. Jeneane Price
Administrative Specialist
Lake Cumberland District Health Dept.
500 Bourne Avenue
Somerset, Kentucky 42501
Opinion
Opinion By: David L. Armstrong, Attorney General; Thomas R. Emerson, Assistant Attorney General
Ms. Madelynn Coldiron has appealed to the Attorney General pursuant to KRS 61.880 your denial of her request to inspect certain public records in your custody. She describes the material in question as the employment contract between the Executive Director of the District Health Department and the Department's Board of Directors. She also maintains that your agency has violated the provisions of KRS 61.880(4) in that your agency has repeatedly made her efforts to inspect public records more difficult than contemplated by the law.
In your letters of April 26, 1985 and May 9, 1985 to Ms. Coldiron you stated that the contracts between the District Health Department's Executive Director and the District Health Department are exempt from public inspection pursuant to KRS 61.878(1)(a).
Opinion of the Attorney General
KRS 61.878(1)(a) provides that among those public records excluded from the application of the Open Records Act and subject to inspection only upon the order of a court of competent jurisdiction are public records containing information of a personal nature where the public disclosure thereof would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
This Office, however, has consistently held that contracts of employment involving a public agency are public records and should be made available for public inspection. The exemption set forth in KRS 61.878(1)(a) does not apply to the factual situation involved in this appeal.
See, for example, OAG 81-288, copy enclosed, where we said that a contract between a superintendent and a school district is a public record and should be made available for public inspection. In addition, a requester is also entitled to obtain a copy of the record he has requested to inspect. Furthermore, in OAG 82-169, copy enclosed, we said that contracts between a Board of Education and its attorneys should be made available for public inspection. Contracts of public agencies must be openly made and available for inspection by the public. It was also noted that, generally, vouchers and other business records of a public agency are open to public inspection under the Kentucky Open Records Law.
It is, therefore, the opinion of the Attorney General that your denial of the request to inspect the employment contract between the district health department and the executive director of the district health department was improper and in violation of the Open Records Act.
In regard to the allegations that your agency has violated KRS 61.880(4) in that it has repeatedly made a requester's efforts to inspect public records more difficult than contemplated by the Open Records Act, we can only reply by citing some general principles. The appealing party has not attached copies of all of her correspondence with your agency and apparently some of the situations she complains of involved oral rather than written instructions, directives and statements from your agency.
It is contrary to the letter and spirit of the Open Records Law for a public agency to make it more difficult to inspect a public record than it was before the enactment of the law. Records which are easily described and readily available should not be temporarily withheld from public inspection by governmental red tape under the pretense of complying with the Open Records Act. See OAG 76-588, copy enclosed.
Furthermore, in our opinion, part of the legislative intent in the enactment of the Open Records Act was that public employees should exercise patience and be long suffering in making public records available for public inspection. Note that when a public records dispute is taken to court, KRS 61.882(3) requires that "the burden of proof shall be on the public agency to sustain its action." See OAG 77-151, copy enclosed.
Thus, every public agency should make every attempt to comply with the letter and spirit of the Open Records Act. Every legitimate request, not covered by a statutory exemption, should be complied with as quickly and courteously as possible. The availability of the records should be subject to no more restrictions than are necessary to protect the records and avoid unduly disrupting the agency's operations.
As required by statute, a copy of this opinion is being sent to the requesting party. If you decide not to comply with this opinion, you may initiate further proceedings pursuant to KRS 61.880(5).