http://www.ag.ky.gov/NR/rdonlyres/05586AA1-146F-47DE-85BA-C2D06829764D/0... <--link to opinion

I received the opinion today of the Kentucky Attorney General regarding my appeal of the University of Kentucky's denial of my request for documents that I was provided during a public meeting a couple months ago which were taken back from me by force and a threat of arrest by some UK researchers who were supposedly doing a study of what public opinion was in the Paducah area of building a nuclear power plant at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion site after the site is shut down and "cleaned up." (see http://www.ruralthoughts.net/?q=node/409 and several other subsequent followups.)

And while he did rule that it appears that the researchers were OK in keeping the names of the advisory board confidential, because they had promised them confidentiality (something they never told me or anyone else at the meeting), he did rule that the UK researchers had violated the KY open records law in not allowing me to maintain my copies of the "visualizations" that had provided to me and taken back under the threat of arrest.

The Attorney General rejected the university's arguments that this was not a public meeting, but non- public, instead, because it was "by invitation only," because it was not disputed that an uninvited person had walked in from the hallway and was allowed to sit down and participate in the meeting. It was also noted that nowhere in the documents was it stated that they were confidential, and that Open Records law in Kentucky "recogniz(ed) that 'if inspection is permitted, the requester enjoys a corollary right to obtain copies" - exactly what I was arguing when the police were called on me.

The UK has a right to sue to challenge this order. Let's see if they do. It would be shameful, but I wouldn't put it past them. Otherwise, it's time for this research team to apologize and provide me what they promised they would many weeks ago. (They fibbed to the Attorney General and said they didn't promise me that they would send them.)

The Attorney General did not rule on my request for copies of the recordings of the meetings, because he found that I had not provided the required written requests for the records as the statue provides. I will have to review my filing as I thought I had, but we all make mistakes. If I didn't, I will probably refile my appeal and my request to the university. But they should do the right thing and release the recordings. That will prove or disprove a number of things that I and the university have said about the meeting which differ.