BEFORE THE STATE RECORDS COMMITTEE OF THE STATE OF UTAH
MICHAEL R. WEIBEL, Appellant, vs
LOGAN CITY, Appellee
DECISION AND ORDER, CASE NO. 94-06
By this appeal, Appellant, Michael R. Weibel, an employee of the Herald Tribune of Logan, Utah, seeks an order compelling Logan City to release to him records appellant described in his written appeal as follows:
The police report completed recently during the investigation of wrongdoings in Logan's Park Department (involving Steve Kyriopoulos and Ed Stephens) and submitted to Mayor Clark. Also, any written agreement that may have been drafted between the city, acting City Attorney Scott Barrett and Steve Kyriopoulos involving the city's willingness not to prosecute.
Appellant appeared personally at the hearing held May 4, 1994. Appellee appeared at the hearing through counsel, Mark Sorenson, Esq.
The State Records Committee, having reviewed the written materials submitted by the parties, and having heard the testimony and argument, now issues the following decision and order.
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION
The appeal regarding the "police report" is granted in part and denied in part. The appeal regarding a purported written agreement between Scott Barrett and Steve Kyriopoulos is denied on the basis of the non-existence of such a written agreement. The "police report," consisting of a memorandum and a summary of prior notes, is within the category of "record" as defined in Utah Code Ann. 63-2-103(18)(a) and is not excluded from that category by any provision of 63-2-103(18)(b). That portion of the report that pertains only to persons against whom Logan City contemplates no further civil, criminal or administrative action is properly classifiable as a public record under Utah Code Ann. 63-2-201(2) and is not "protected" under Utah Code Ann. 63-2-304(8). However, that portion of the report that pertains to persons against whom criminal action is contemplated or pending is protected under Utah Code Ann. 63-2- 304(8)(a)(b) and (c). The interest in disclosure of the portion of the record described in the immediately preceding sentence does not outweigh the interest favoring restriction of access under Utah Code Ann. 63-2-403(11)(b).
ORDER
WHEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that appellant's appeal is granted in part and denied in part, the portions of the record identified in the preceding section of this Decision as public to be disclosed to Appellant and the portions identified as protected not to be disclosed.
RIGHT TO APPEAL
Either party may appeal this Decision and Order to district court. The petition for review must be filed no later than 30 days after the date of this order. The petition for judicial review must be a complaint. The complaint and the appeals process are governed by the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure and by Utah Code Ann. 63-2-404 & 502(7). The court is required to make its decision de novo. In order to protect its rights on appeal, a party may wish to seek advice from an attorney.
Entered this 9th day of May, 1994.
MAX J. EVANS,
Chair, State Records Committee