State Records Committee Appeal 00-11
BEFORE THE STATE RECORDS COMMITTEE OF THE STATE OF UTAH
JESS GREEN, Appellant, vs.
AMERICAN FORK CITY, Appellee.
Case No. 00-11
By this appeal, Jess Green seeks an order compelling American Fork City to produce "documents or records that were transmitted by A.F. City FAX #763-3030 on 28 Oct 98 to the FAX #537-5630, identified by the City as used by private Atty. Kathryn Collard . . . ." Appellant also seeks "[a]ll documents received, from private attorney Kathrine [sic] Collard, by defendants American Fork City, Carl Wanlass, Tucker Hansen, or Jess Green after the 8th of August, 1996 . . . ." Appellant was represented by George E. Brown, Jr. Appellee was represented by Kevin R. Bennett.
The State Records Committee, having reviewed the materials submitted by the parties, and having heard oral argument and testimony on January 10, 2001, now issues the following Decision and Order.
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION
1. American Fork City correctly denied Mr. Green's request. Based on the Affidavits of Terry V. Fox, Carl T. Wanlass, Ted Burton Barratt and James ("Tucker") Hansen and the argument of counsel, along with other evidence presented at the hearing, the committee is persuaded that the city does not have the requested records in its possession.
2. The committee is not persuaded by Mr. Green's argument that all records transmitted or received by the police department fax machine become public records. Using public property to transmit private communications does not make those communications public. The committee does not have jurisdiction over private communications between a private lawyer and her clients.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT the appeal of Mr. Green is denied in its entirety.
RIGHT TO APPEAL
Either party may appeal this Decision and Order to the District Court. The petition for review must be filed no later than thirty (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 (2000). 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 16th day of January, 2001.
BY THE STATE RECORDS COMMITTEE
Cherie Willis, Chairperson
State Records Committee