State Records Committee Appeal 95-05

BEFORE THE STATE RECORDS COMMITTEE OF THE STATE OF UTAH

LANCE T. WILKERSON, Appellant, v.

AUDITING DIVISION, UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, Appellee

DECISION AND ORDER Case No. 95-05

Appellant, Lance T. Wilkerson, seeks an order reversing Appellee's denial of Appellant's request for all "manuals, policy statements and other materials on the conduct of audits in general and not as to any specific audit." Appellant was present at the hearing before the Records Committee held July 18, 1995, and represented himself and was also represented by counsel, Russ Harris. Appellee was represented by Susan L. Barnum, Assistant Attorney General, State of Utah. The State Records Committee having reviewed the written materials submitted by the parties and having heard testimony and argument, now issues the following decision and order.

STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION

The Appeal is granted in part and denied in part. Appellee has already supplied to Appellant some of the materials requested, which the Committee confirms as legally correct. As to remaining records requested, those related to audit selection and audit procedure are protected under Utah Code Ann. 63-2-304(13) (Supp. 1994) and are not to be released. However, records related to time tracking and training, the answer to petition (sample letter) and all other records requested that do not relate to audit selection or audit procedure, and therefore are not protected, shall be released to Appellant as public records under Utah Code Ann. 63-2-201 (Supp. 1994).

ORDER

WHEREFORE, it is ordered that Appellant's appeal is granted in part and denied in part, as stated above.

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 (1993) and 63-2-502(7) (Supp. 1994). The Court is required to make its decision de novo. In order to protect its rights of appeal, a party may wish to seek advice from an attorney.

Entered this 20th day of July, 1995.

MAX J. EVANS,
Chair, State Records Committee

 

Page Last Updated .