Skip to main content

Request By:

Mr. Delmis Donta
Superintendent
Boyd County School System
1104 McCullough Drive
P.O. Box 5059
Ashland, Kentucky 41105-5059

Opinion

Opinion By: Frederic J. Cowan, Attorney General; Thomas R. Emerson, Assistant Attorney General

Mr. Roger Alford has appealed to the Attorney General pursuant to KRS 61.880 your denial of his request to inspect and copy certain records in the custody of the school system.

In a letter to you dated April 18, 1988, Mr. Alford requested that you furnish him with the names and addresses of all students currently enrolled at Cooper Elementary School.

Mr. Alford wrote a letter to the Attorney General, dated May 5, 1988, in which he stated that you never responded to his request for the names and addresses of the students.

This office responded with a letter to Mr. Alford, dated May 13, 1988, a copy of which you received. We advised Mr. Alford that his letter had been directed to the school system's attorney and that he should receive a response shortly relative to the school system's decision concerning his request under the Open Records Act.

Mr. Alford, in a letter to this office, dated June 29, 1988, stated he is appealing to this office your apparent denial of his request under the Open Record Act. He states he still has not received an "official" response from the school system although he did enclose an unsigned letter to him from you, dated May 19, 1988, which he said a fellow reporter picked up at a school board meeting.

Your letter of May 19, 1988, denied Mr. Alford's request and cited KRS 61.878(1)(a) and 20 USC Section 1232g in support of your decision. You concluded your letter with the following sentence:

"It is the Board's position that to disclose the names, addresses and telephone numbers of elementary school students to the press is clearly a violation of the rights to privacy of these children and their parents and are therefore respectfully declining to furnish you the same."

The undersigned Assistant Attorney General talked with you by telephone on July 6 or 7, 1988. In response to my question as to whether the letter of May 19, 1988, was the school system's official response you said you would check into the matter. Since I have not heard from you as of July 12, 1988, I am assuming that the letter to Mr. Alford from you, dated May 19, 1988, is the school systems official response. This office will now proceed to deal with the issues presented by Mr. Alford's appeal.

OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

KRS 61.880 sets forth the duties and obligations of a public agency relative to the receipt of a request to inspect and copy public records. KRS 61.880(1) provides in part that a public agency, upon receiving a request for records, shall determine within three working days after the receipt of the request whether to comply with the request and shall notify in writing within the three day period the person making the request. KRS 61.880(2) requires that a copy of the written response denying inspection of a public record be sent to the Attorney General.

The school system has not complied with the sections of KRS 61.880(1) and (2) mentioned above. It is hoped that in the future the school system in its responses to requests to inspect public documents will abide by the statutorily imposed duties and requirements. Note the provisions of KRS 61.882(5) and KRS 61.991(2) pertaining to willful violations.

Among those public records which may be withheld from public inspection in the absence of a court order authorizing inspection are those described in KRS 61.878(1)(a) as, "Public records containing information of a personal nature where the public disclosure thereof would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. "

This office has dealt with the privacy exception to the public inspection of documents on many occasions. While we have recognized that many things about public employees may be withheld, we have consistently said that the names of public employees are matters of public record. Probably the least private thing about any particular person is his name. Thus we believe that the names of persons attending a public elementary school are matters of public record. This would also apply to those schools receiving federal funds as we find nothing in 20 USCA § 1232g (Family educational and privay rights) which prevents the disclosure of such information.

This office has, however, consistently stated that governmental employees are entitled to privacy as far as their personal lives and off duty activities are concerned. This would also apply to students attending public schools. Thus, we believe that the school may refuse to divulge the home addresses of those persons attending that school. See OAG 87-37, copy enclosed, at page four, and OAG 87-77, copy enclosed, at pages two and three.

If the school system already has an existing list of students attending the elementary school in question, it should make copies of that list available pursuant to KRS 61.874(2). "The public agency may prescribe a reasonable fee for making copies of public records which shall not exceed the actual cost thereof not including the cost of staff required."

If no such list is available the school system can either let the requesting party go through its records and compile his own list or it can prepare a list and charge the requesting party for the staff time required to prepare such a list. In OAG 84-127 we said in part as follows:

"The Department of Agriculture is not required to compile such lists if they are not already in existence. However, compliation not already in existence. However, compilation of a list may prove to be more expedient than allowing Progressive Farmer to peruse files in compiling their own list. If the Department prepares such a list for the purpose of selling the list, it may charge for the staff required to prepare the list. Any fee for a list already in existence can only be for the copying expense not including the cost of staff. "

See also OAG 88-19, copy enclosed.

Thus, in conclusion, it is the opinion of the Attorney General that the public agency violated KRS 61.880(1) and (2) in its handling of the request to inspect public records. While the school system may refuse to disclose the home addresses of students it may not withhold the names of students attending the school. A list of names should be furnished, if currently available, or the school system should prepare such a list or let the requesting party prepare his own list from school system records.

As required by statute a copy of this opinion is being mailed to the appealing party, Mr. Roger Alford. Since this opinion has adopted findings and conclusions some of which are adverse to the positions advocated by both the appealing party and the school system and its superintendent, either party has the right to challenge it in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882.

LLM Summary
The decision addresses an appeal regarding the denial of a request to inspect and copy the names and addresses of students from a public school. The Attorney General's opinion clarifies that while the names of students are public records and should be disclosed, their home addresses may be withheld to protect privacy. The decision also discusses the appropriate fees for copying public records and the conditions under which a public agency must comply with requests for records under KRS 61.880.
Disclaimer:
The Sunshine Law Library is not exhaustive and may contain errors from source documents or the import process. Nothing on this website should be taken as legal advice. It is always best to consult with primary sources and appropriate counsel before taking any action.
Type:
Open Records Decision
Lexis Citation:
1988 Ky. AG LEXIS 50
Forward Citations:
Neighbors

Support Our Work

The Coalition needs your help in safeguarding Kentuckian's right to know about their government.