Request By:
Mr. Wallace L. Nay
Oldham County Sheriff
Courthouse
LaGrange, Kentucky 40031Mrs. Martha R. Davis
Oldham County Clerk
Courthouse
LaGrange, Kentucky 40031Mr. Jim L. McWilliams
Property Valuation Administrator
Oldham County Courthouse
LaGrange, Kentucky 40031
Opinion
Opinion By: David L. Armstrong, Attorney General; Thomas R. Emerson, Assistant Attorney General
Ms. Kit Millay has appealed to the Attorney General pursuant to KRS 61.880 your handling of and your apparent denial of a request by one of her reporters, Ms. Susanna Cornett, to obtain from each of you materials pertaining to the salaries of yourselves and your staffs for the 1985-1986 fiscal year.
According to Ms. Millay, Ms. Cornett made a written request to each of you on or about October 1, 1986, in which she requested from you materials and documents setting forth your salaries and the salaries of your staff members for the 1985-1986 fiscal year. In addition, Ms. Cornett had spoken with each of you by telephone prior to October 1, 1986, and had been requested during those conversations to send you written requests.
Ms. Millay further maintains that no response of any kind was received from Mrs. Davis and Mr. McWilliams relative to Ms. Cornett's letters to them. Furthermore, she stated that while the sheriff orally denied the written request, he set forth no specific grounds other than he does not believe the material requested of him falls under the Open Records Laws as salaries in his office are paid in whole or in part by fees.
OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
In the opinion of this office all of your offices constitute public agencies as that term is defined in KRS 61.870(1) as all of you are state or local officers. We, therefore, direct your attention to that section of the Open Records Act dealing in part with the responsibilities of a public agency when it receives a request to inspect and copy public documents.
KRS 61.880(1) states that a public agency shall determine within three working days after the receipt of the request to inspect public records whether to comply with the request. The public agency is required to notify in writing the person making the request. A response of a public agency denying in whole or in part the inspection of any record shall include a statement of the specific exception relied upon in denying the request. Furthermore, KRS 61.880(2) requires that the public agency forward immediately to the State Attorney General a copy of the written response denying inspection of the public records in question. See OAG 85-120 and OAG 86-36, copies of which are enclosed.
It is, therefore, the opinion of the Attorney General that none of you acted in accordance with the requirements of the Open Records Law, specifically KRS 61.880(1), since none of you have neither made the requested records available for inspection nor advised the requesting party in writing within the statutorily mandated time period of a specific reason why the records could not be inspected. Since the sheriff has apparently made a timely oral statement relative to the non-availability of the records requested this office will consider his contention shortly. As the county clerk and the property valuation administrator have made no timely response of any kind it is also the opinion of this office that the requesting party has the right to take further action against them in circuit court within thirty days if she is not allowed to inspect the records in question or given an appropriate written response.
The sheriff's oral denial is apparently based on the contention that since he is a fee officer he does not have to reveal the salaries of himself and his staff.
This office has consistently concluded that the public is entitled to know the names, positions, work stations and salaries of state employees. See, for example, OAG 76-717, copy enclosed. The public has an interest in such matters as state employees are carrying on the public's business at public expense. We have also stated that the public has a right to know the salaries of city and county employees. See, for example, OAG 77-723 and OAG 86-38, copies of which are enclosed.
Accountability in the expenditure of funds is required of governmental officers at all levels of government. One of the means by which such accountability is established is by requiring governmental officers to set forth what is being expended in salaries to operate their public offices in the public's interest. Whether the source of the funds expended is taxes, fees, grants or gifts the public has a right to know how governmental officers are spending the money they take in to perform their public functions. In such a situation the public's right to know is greater than the right of a particular person or group of persons or employees to their right of privacy.
It is, therefore, the opinion of the Attorney General that the sheriff's denial of the request to make available documents setting forth his salary and the salaries of his staff members (deputy sheriffs) for the fiscal year in question was improper and in violation of the Open Records Law.
As required by statute a copy of this opinion is being sent to the requesting party, Ms. Kit Millay. If any of you public officials disagree with this opinion or decide not to comply with the findings and conclusions expressed herein you may initiate further proceedings pursuant to KRS 61.880(5).