Request By:
Elmer Langdon, Chief
Leitchfield Police Department
Leitchfield, Kentucky 42754
Opinion
Opinion By: Frederic J. Cowan, Attorney General; Gerard R. Gerhard, Assistant Attorney General
By letter of about June 29, 1989, Mr. Herbert Bounds, has, in substance, appealed to this office regarding possible denial of inspection of police dispatch logs.
FINDINGS IN BRIEF
If the Leitchfield Police Department failed to respond as called for by KRS 61.880, within three days following receipt of a request to inspect certain of its dispatch logs, it may have failed to act consistent with Open Records provisions.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Mr. Herbert Bounds apparently asked to inspect certain dispatch logs of the Leitchfield Police Department, and may have been denied inspection except upon presentment of a subpoena he had obtained through Federal Court.
OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
KRS 61.880(2) provides in part for the Attorney General to, upon request of one denied inspection of public records, issue a written opinion stating whether an agency ". . . acted consistent with provisions of KRS 61.870 to 61.884."
As understood from a telephone conversation with you on October 10, 1989, Mr. Bounds may have been, for a time, perhaps while the inspection request was being cleared with the then Chief, denied inspection of certain police dispatch logs. Ultimately inspection of the logs was permitted. Further, copies of certain of the logs are understood to have been furnished to Mr. Bounds.
This office has observed previously that police dispatch logs are subject to inspection without a court order. See for example, OAG 89-20, copy attached. Of course, as noted in OAG 89-20, in some instances, particular entries upon a police dispatch log perhaps could be properly denied pursuant to KRS 61.878(1)(f). Entries upon a log which may be properly denied pursuant to 61.878(1)(f) must be masked, and remaining entries upon the log made available for inspection.
KRS 61.880 provides, in substance and in part, that a public agency, upon receiving a request to inspect public records, shall determine within three working days whether to comply with the request. The agency is to notify the requester, within that three day period of its decision.
If an agency denies, in whole or in part, inspection of a record, its response must include a statement of the specific exception, among those set forth in KRS 61.878, authorizing withholding of the record, together with a brief explanation of how the exception applies to the record withheld.
A copy of the written response denying inspection is to be forwarded immediately by the agency to the Attorney General.
The Leitchfield Police Department may have failed to act consistent with KRS 61.870 to 61.884 in connection with Mr. Bounds' request to inspect certain of its dispatch logs. Efforts to reach Mr. Bounds by telephone to determine facts from his point of view were unsuccessful. Accordingly, a definitive determination regarding compliance or noncompliance with Open Records provisions cannot be made.
Should Mr. Bounds in the future seek to inspect police dispatch logs, such logs should be made available to him for inspection, subject of course, to any exceptions consistent with KRS 61.878. If inspection of any items is denied, the denial should be made in accordance with KRS 61.880, as explained above.
Your agency may have a right pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) to appeal the findings of this opinion.
As required by statute, a copy of this opinion is being sent to Mr. Herbert Bounds.