Request By:
Lee S. Cholak
Executive Director
Kentucky Horse Park
4089 Iron Works Pike
Lexington, Kentucky 40511
Opinion
Opinion By: Frederic J. Cowan, Attorney General; Thomas R. Emerson, Assistant Attorney General
Debra Ann Doss, Esq., has appealed to the Attorney General pursuant to KRS 61.880 your handling of her request to inspect various records in the custody of the Kentucky Horse Park. Ms. Doss' appeal was reassigned to the undersigned Assistant Attorney General for disposition on September 4, 1990.
In a letter to the Secretary of Tourism Cabinet, dated July 13, 1990, Ms. Doss, apparentley in her capacity as legal counsel for Brenda Ploch, requested to review the following records:
1. Complete personnel file of Brenda Ploch, former employee of Cabinet of Tourism, D.B.A. Kentucky Horse park.
2. Complete personnel files of Willard Mullinex, Zack Smithers, Curtis Wampler, Charlie Wright, David Foley, John Sheborhan, Tim Jones and Pat Oblinger, all of whom are past and/or current employees of the Cabinet of Tourism, D.B.A. Kentucky Horse Park.
3. All memoranda relating to mowers and tractor equipment issued by the Kentucky Horse Park from January 1, 1985 to January 1, 1990.
4. All memoranda, correspondence and/or documentation of whatever kind and nature regarding Brenda Ploch's employment by the Cabinet of Tourism, D.B.A. Kentucky Horse Park from the date of her initial employment to date hereof not included in her personnel file requested hereinabove.
You replied to Ms. Doss in a letter dated August 3, 1990. Ms. Doss was advised that she could inspect Brenda Ploch's personnel file provided she furnish written authorization from Ms. Ploch at the time of the inspection. The request to inspect the personnel files of the other named present and former employees of the Kentucky Horse Park was denied pursuant to KRS 61.878(1)(a).
You advised Ms. Doss that her request to inspect all memoranda relating to mowers and tractor equipment represents a vague, blanket request for documents which lacks sufficient specificity. You would gather such records if she more specifically identified the records in question.
As to Ms. Doss' request to inspect all memoranda, correspondence and documentation of whatever kind concerning Brenda Ploch's employment, not included in her personnel file, you said in part that you could not comply with such a request because it is a vague, blanket request, lacking sufficient specificity for you to assembly such material.
In a letter to the Attorney General, dated August 7, 1990, Ms. Doss requested a review of your denial of her requests.
OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
The function of the Attorney General relative to appeals under the Open Records Act, as set forth in KRS 61.880(2), is to review, when asked, denials of requests by public agencies and determine whether the agency acted consistent with the provisions of KRS 61.870 to KRS 61.884.
Brenda Ploch is or was a state employee and KRS 61.878(3) provides in part that no exemption set forth in KRS 61.878 shall be construed to deny or impede the right of a state employee to inspect and copy any record including preliminary and other supporting documentation that relates to him. See also OAG 87-50, copy enclosed.
Thus, Brenda Ploch certainly has a right to inspect her personnel file. However, in the interest of protecting her right of privacy it is proper for the public agency to require written permission from Ms. Ploch before anyone else, including her attorney, examines her entire personnel file.
The public agency was within its discretion when it refused to permit Ms. Doss to examine the entire personnel files of the other named public employees.
A personnel file contains a mixture of personal and nonpersonal material. Therefore, a general request to examine the entire personnel file may be denied as a requesting party should specifically identify what portions of the file he seeks to inspect. In
Board of Education of Fayette County v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission, Ky. App., 625 S.W.2d 109 (1981), the court said in part that no public interest would be served by a complete disclosure of a personnel file. There is a right to privacy which should be protected. See OAG 83-329, copy enclosed, relative to personnel records, and OAG 89-17 and OAG 87-37, copies enclosed, dealing with the concept of privacy.
KRS 61.878(1)(a) permits a public agency to withhold from public inspection those public records containing information of a personal nature where public disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Much of the information in a personnel file could be withheld pursuant to this statutorily recognized exception to the inspection of public records.
In connection with the request to inspect memoranda relating to mowers and tractor equipment, the undersigned spoke by telephone on September 7, 1990 with Mr. Bob Bates of the Kentucky Horse Park. Apparently Ms. Doss is concerned with memoranda pertaining to the utilization of mowing equipment by personnel of the Kentucky Horse Park, as opposed, for example, to the purchase of such equipment by the Horse Park. It is my understanding that Mr. Bates will make available to Ms. Doss copies of memoranda dated May 27 and June 24, 1987 relative to the use of mowing equipment by agency personnel as well as any other memoranda of a similar nature which can be found. Such action by Mr. Bates will be considered to have satisfied Ms. Doss' request in regard to this point and will be deemed to have placed the Kentucky Horse Park in compliance with the terms and provisions of the Open Records Law. If this material is not considered by Ms. Doss to be responsive to her request she will have to more specifically describe those records she wishes to inspect.
The fourth group of documents sought by Ms. Doss consists of all memoranda, correspondence and documents of whatever kind and nature, pertaining to Ms. Ploch, and not included in her personnel file.
In OAG 76-375, copy enclosed, we said that blanket requests for information on a particular subject without specifying certain documents need not be honored. A private citizen may conduct a fishing expedition through public records on his own time and under reasonable restrictions and safeguards imposed by the public agency. A person must be able to describe the records he seeks to inspect with some specificity in order that they may be located by the public agency. See also OAG 89-8 and OAG 84-342, copies of which are enclosed.
If Ms. Doss expects the public agency to locate and provide documents pertaining to Ms. Ploch, which are not in Ms. Ploch's personnel file, she will have to be more specific as to the documents she seeks. The public agency is not required to search for material which the requesting party cannot describe with some degree of clarity.
In conclusion, it is the opinion of the Attorney General that the Kentucky Horse Park, if it makes available those documents relative to the use of mowing equipment by agency personnel, has acted consistent with the terms and conditions of the Open Records Act in its response to the requests of Debra Ann Doss, Esq. Requests to examine the entire personnel files of government employees need not be honored and blanket requests for material on a particular subject which do not specify particular documents need not be honored.
As required by statute, a copy of this opinion is being mailed to the appealing party, Debra Ann Doss, Esq., who has the right to challenge it in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882.