|
GREENUP -- An attorney for an
Elliott County animal shelter is asking that a local animal shelter
operator be held in contempt of court and possibly even serve jail
time for failing to comply with recent court rulings.
During
a hearing in Greenup Circuit Court Monday, Robert Caummisar, attorney
for the Elliott no-kill shelter The Trixie Foundation, claimed Don
Grubb, the operator of Tri-County Animal Shelter in Greenup, had
"thumbed his nose" at the state Attorney General's Office, the circuit
court and the Kentucky Court of Appeals by not providing the
foundation with records requested over the past two years.
The
foundation is seeking attorney fees, court costs and $25 per day for
non-compliance with the open records law. Caummisar tacked on a
request for jail time Monday following testimony from Grubb, who
repeatedly disputed the foundation's right to view his records.
"Based
on his behavior this morning, I think that (jail time) might be
required," Caummisar told Circuit Judge Lewis Nicholls. "(Grubb)
has set himself up as being superior to the attorney general, this
court and the Court of Appeals. Shame on him."
The
facts, according to Lyon, are that the requests made by Skaggs--which
also included requests for contract information from the four counties
the shelter works with--are either void or immaterial.
Tri-County is exempt from providing contract information, he said,
because making such information public could cost the shelter its
competitive edge in bidding to provide county services.
Grubb
said he understood the opinions issued by these agencies over the past
two years, but does not agree with them.
He said
he is not required by state law to keep records the foundation
requested, and did not have those records to give for that very
reason.
Caummisar alleged Grubb did have some records requested by The Trixie
Foundation, and deliberately destroyed them, an allegation Grubb
denied.
Grubb's
attorney, James Lyon, Jr., said he believes there are no grounds for
contempt in Grubb's case, saying Tri-County Animal Shelter either did
not have the requested records or was exempt from all records requests
from the foundation.
The two
groups began their court case in the summer of 2001, when Randy
Skaggs, owner and operator of The Trixie Foundation, issued a request
for several categories of records, ranging from employee salaries to
records for each dog kept in the shelter and methods of euthanization.
Skaggs issued the request after four Greenup County residents alleged
their dogs were taken to the shelter and killed before the
state-mandated five-day waiting period for an owner to claim their
dog.
|
Grubb,
who claims those dogs were never in his shelter, initially held that
Tri-County, owned by his wife, Nora, is a private business and not
subject to the open records law.
Skaggs
appealed to the attorney general, which ruled the shelter is a public
entity because it receives the majority of its funds from government
sources.
The
shelter appealed to the circuit court, where Nicholls ruled that The
Trixie Foundation had the right to view Tri-County's records, but had
to supply its own copier, while Tri-County had to supply the power for
the copier. Both sides appealed that ruling, and the Court of
Appeals ruled in the foundation's favor.
In the
meantime, there were various filings for dismissal because of
Tri-County's apparent failure to respond to the initial records
request in a timely fashion.
In
court Monday, Grubb expressed some frustration with two years of
litigation.
"It's
my understanding that this got all tangled up in deadlines, and we've
never gotten down to nuts and bolts," he said from the stand.
"There has never been a presentation of the facts of this case until
today."
Grubb
also maintained from the stand that he is a private contractor, and
matters such as his income and contract negotiations should not be
public record.
As for
the contracts themselves, Grubb said, the foundation could obtain
those from the county fiscal courts.
While
acknowledging some of the requests were immaterial--such as a request
for board member names and addresses when the shelter has no board--Caummisar
maintained that the shelter had records on dogs when they were
requested, whether or not required by law to keep them, and did not
turn them over.
Lyon
countered that the shelter could not be forced to turn over records
they are not required to keep.
Nicholls said he needed time to review the statutes in question, and
would take the issue under consideration.
"I will
get you something within a reasonable time," he said.
Go to Article
|
