Opinion
Opinion By: Jack Conway, Attorney General; James M. Herrick, Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Decision
The question presented in this appeal is whether the Kenton County Clerk violated the Kentucky Open Records Act in the disposition of Travis Wayne Bush's June 8, 2009, request for copies of records related to a particular individual. For the reasons that follow, we find that the County Clerk's actions did not violate the Act.
In his June 8 request, Mr. Bush requested the following in relation to the named individual:
1. Driving History Record
2. Drivers License Photo
3. Complete Vehicle History Information including previous owners and violations (see below for tag numbers)
4. Insurance Providers
Since it is apparent from the record that Mr. Bush's request was sent to the Circuit Clerk instead of the County Clerk, there appears to be no genuine dispute that the County Clerk did not receive the request until after this appeal was initiated on June 18, 2009.
On June 25, 2009, Mike Clary of the Kenton County Clerk's office advised this office that Mr. Bush had been mailed copies of all existing documents responsive to his request. Furthermore, on June 29, 2009, Kenton County Attorney Garry L. Edmondson responded in writing to this office and to Mr. Bush, indicating that the County Clerk had not received Mr. Bush's request and further stating as follows:
As you know the County Clerk does not have records concerning the driving history of individuals, the Administrative Office of the Courts has those records. AOC can be contacted in Frankfort.
Again, the County Clerk does not have photographs. AOC has them.
The Clerk after receiving your Notice forwarded all information he has involving the vehicle registration information requested, as well as insurance information.
KRS 61.872(4) provides that "[i]f the person to whom the application is directed does not have custody or control of the public record requested, that person shall notify the applicant and shall furnish the name and location of the official custodian of the agency's public records." In 08-ORD-239, the Attorney General ruled that the Louisville Metro Department of Corrections substantially complied with KRS 61.872(4) by advising the applicant "that it did not have records related to the operation and activities of the Louisville Metro Police Department and notif[ying] him that he should address his request to that agency." Id., p. 3. In this case, we likewise believe the Kenton County Attorney's response is in substantial compliance with the requirements of the statute. Accordingly, we find no violation of 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 proceedings.
Travis Wayne BushRodney Eldridge, ClerkGarry L. Edmondson, Esq.