Request By:
[NO REQUESTBY IN ORIGINAL]
Opinion
Opinion By: A. B. Chandler III, Attorney General; Thomas R. Emerson, Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Decision
This matter having been presented to the Attorney General in an open records appeal, and the Attorney General being sufficiently advised, we find that Kentucky State University violated KRS 61.880(1) by failing to respond to Robert K. Landrum's September 30, 1996, request to inspect various documents maintained by the University. We believe that 95-ORD-114, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference, is controlling. The University is directed to immediately arrange for Mr. Landrum to inspect the records identified in his request.
On October 29, 1996, this office received a fax transmission from University counsel Harold Greene. Mr. Greene invoked KRS 61.872(6), arguing that Mr. Landrum's requests are unreasonably burdensome. Acknowledging that KRS 61.872(6) requires that KSU sustain its denial by clear and convincing evidence, Mr. Greene offered none. Instead, he asserted that the University and Mr. Landrum have "an antagonistic relationship," that Mr. Landrum has initiated three actions against the University, and that his "voluminous and persistent requests lead the University to believe that these requests are intended to disrupt our function as a public agency." Based on the reasoning articulated in 93-ORD-72, we do not believe that KSU has made the requisite showing under KRS 61.872(6), or that it is excused from the procedural requirements of the Open Records Act by these "voluminous and persistent" requests.
We remind the University that KRS 61.991(2)(a) establishes penalties for public officials who violate the Open Records Act. The facts of this appeal, along with the five other appeals filed by Mr. Landrum, suggest a need for the University to review and understand its basic statutory duties under the Open Records Act.
A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating action in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882. Pursuant to KRS 61.880(3), the Attorney General should be notified of any action in circuit court, but should not be named as a party in that action or in any subsequent proceeding.