Request By:
Mr. Bill Brown
Superintendent
McCracken County Public Schools
Route 10, Box 1, Bleich Road
Paducah, Kentucky 42001
Opinion
Opinion By: David L. Armstrong, Attorney General; Thomas R. Emerson, Assistant Attorney General
Ms. Pansey A. King has appealed to the Attorney General pursuant to KRS 61.880 your partial denial of her request to inspect certain documents in your possession. She describes the item in question as a part of the agenda for a meeting of the school board, specifically a document labeled "Administrative Memorandum, " which consists primarily of the superintendent's recommendations to the board on a variety of topics.
In a letter to you dated May 29, 1986, Ms. King requested that you furnish her with a copy of each month's school board meeting agenda, the copy to be mailed to her at a particular address. Your letter of June 2, 1986, to Ms. King advised her that she would be furnished with a copy of the agenda if she would appear at the Board's office and request and pay for such a copy. You further advised that the agenda is not prepared on any specific day and you suggested she check with the board's personnel two days before the scheduled board meeting.
In her letter of appeal to this office, dated July 1, 1986, Ms. King maintained that she was only furnished with a portion of the agenda for a meeting of the school board. She stated that she was not given a copy of that part of the agenda described as an "Administrative Memorandum, " which consists primarily of the superintendent's recommendations to the school board.
The undersigned Assistant Attorney General talked with you by telephone on July 24, 1986, in an attempt to learn more about the situation in question. You stated that a copy of the actual agenda will always be made available, as soon as it has been prepared, to those persons who request a copy from the Board of Education's Office. The document labeled "Administrative Memorandum, " containing the superintendent's recommendations on a variety of matters, is made available at the meeting of the school board, copies permitting, or shortly after the meeting if there are not enough copies to distribute at the meeting. This document is not part of the agenda of the board for any particular meeting. The "Administrative Memorandum" deals in part with the monthly financial report but the financial data will be made available to anyone who requests it from the school system.
OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
The parties to this appeal agree and this office has previously so stated in OAG 77-221, copy enclosed, that where an agenda has been prepared relative to a meeting of the school board, such a document is a public record and subject to public inspection under the Open Records Law (KRS 61.870 to KRS 61.884). The primary problem here apparently pertains to the definition of "agenda" and whether the document designated as "Administrative Memorandum" is part of the agenda for any given meeting.
The word "agenda" has been defined in part as "a list or outline of things to be done, subjects to be discussed, or business to be transacted," "a plan of procedure," "items of business or discussion to be brought up at a meeting." See Webster's Third New International Dictionary and Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed., p. 85.
The "Administrative Memorandum, " which is basically a written communication from the superintendent to the members of the school board, setting forth the superintendent's proposals and recommendations concerning numerous items to be considered at the school board's upcoming meeting, is not the agenda for that meeting. It is an intradepartmental or intraagency memorandum in which opinions are expressed and proposals and recommendations are made.
Copies of the actual agenda for any given meeting are furnished as soon as the agenda has been prepared. While the "Administrative Memorandum" is temporarily withheld, it is made available at the school board meeting or shortly after the meeting, depending upon the number of copies prepared and the number of requests for such copies. Such a memorandum would have to be made available if and when it represents final action of the Board of Education as it would then lose its preliminary status. In addition, while the "Administrative Memorandum" deals in part with the monthly financial report, such data will be made available upon a request for that particular information.
KRS 61.878(1) (h) provides that among the records and documents which may be excluded from public inspection, in the absence of a court order authorizing inspection, are those described as, "Preliminary recommendations, and preliminary memoranda in which opinions are expressed or policies formulated or recommended." This office has previously concluded that a request to inspect reports from an inspector to a supervisor may be denied when those reports contain the inspector's observations, opinions and recommendations as they constitute intraoffice memoranda pursuant to KRS 61.878(1)(h). See, for example, OAG 86-5 and OAG 85-104, copies of which are enclosed.
In connection with that part of Ms. King's request that she be furnished, by mail, with a copy of the board's agenda prior to each monthly meeting, we direct the attention of both parties to OAG 81-212, copy enclosed, page one. In that opinion we said that the Open Records Law does not automatically require a public agency to send copies of documents. The right to a copy is ancillary to the right to inspect [KRS 61.874(1)]. Furthermore, a person has no right under the Open Record's Act to require a public agency to send copies of documents that will be prepared or acquired in the future.
It is, therefore, the opinion of the Attorney General that the school superintendent's temporary withholding from public inspection of the "Administrative Memorandum" was proper pursuant to KRS 61.878(1)(h), so long as he furnishes upon request material relative to the monthly financial report, as such a memorandum is not an agenda but a preliminary intrasystem memorandum containing the superintendent's proposals and recommendations relative to items to be considered at meetings of the board of education.
As required by statute a copy of this opinion is being sent to the requesting party, Ms. Pansey A. King, who has the right to challenge it in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5).