Request By:
[NO REQUESTBY IN ORIGINAL]
Opinion
Opinion By: Albert B. Chandler III, Attorney General; James M. Ringo, Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Decision
This matter is before the Attorney General on appeal from the denial by the City Clerk of Calvert City of the open records request of Martin W. Johnson to inspect the "Application for Entertainment Permit filed by Gary Hovekamp and J. T. Carneal."
Troy Truitt, City Clerk, relying upon KRS 61.878(1)(i), denied Mr. Johnson's request, stating that the "Application referenced in your inspection request is preliminary in nature and has not been the subject of official action by the City."
For the reasons that follow, we conclude that the City's denial of access to the requested application was improper under the Open Records Act.
This office has previously recognized that applications for a license are generally not exempt from public inspection. OAG 80-444; OAG 81-51.
In OAG 81-51, we held that the City of Ashland improperly denied a request to inspect an application for a local beer distributor's license. In that decision we stated:
It is our opinion that the State ABC Board is not authorized to have a policy which does not allow inspection of beer distributor applications until they have either been approved or denied. We note that KRS 243.360 requires every person applying for an alcoholic beverage license from the state shall publish a notice of his intention to apply for a license and "the advertisement shall state the name and address of the applicant if he is an individual, the names and addresses of the members of a partnership if the applicant is a partnership, as well as the name of the business and its address, or, if the applicant is a corporation, the names and addresses of the principle officers and directors of the corporation as well as the name and address of the corporation itself, the location of the premises for which the license is sought, and the type of license to be applied for." Further, there is no administrative regulation requiring ABC to keep applications confidential. 804 KAR 4.
It is, therefore, our opinion that any person may inspect and obtain a copy of any application for a beer distributor's license made to a state or local agency. We conclude that you wrongfully denied [the requester's] request to inspect and obtain a copy of the above described documents.
In OAG 80-444, we held that information appearing on an application for a proposed bank charter which was material to the Department of Banking's approval of that application was subject to public inspection. In reaching that holding, we stated:
If, therefore, the Department elicited information from applicants, and had the information on file, the information was a matter of public record. We believe that these opinions support the proposition that the public is entitled to know what information a public agency relies on in determining whether a permit will issue, unless that information is specifically exempted from the operation of the Open Records Act.
We believe that OAG 81-51 and OAG 80-400, and the authorities cited therein, are controlling on the issue on appeal and conclude the City improperly denied Mr. Johnson's request to inspect the Application prior to the City Council taking official action on the application. Copies of these opinions are attached hereto and incorporated by reference.
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.