Committee advances proof-of-residency requirement for open-records requests amid access concerns
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
House Bill 567 passed the House State Government Committee on a favorable vote (14–1–3). The bill would allow official custodians to require proof of residency for open-records requests, clarify the definition of a resident to include foreign businesses with a physical Kentucky location, and exclude third parties acting on behalf of others.
The House State Government Committee advanced House Bill 567, a measure that would allow official custodians of public records to require proof of residency from requesters and clarifies that a "resident of the Commonwealth" includes foreign business entities with a physical location in Kentucky.
Representative Patrick Flannery (R-96th District), the bill sponsor, said the bill responds to an increase in automated or AI-driven requests and aims to enforce the existing residency requirement by allowing custodians to require documentation. "This bill tries to address a problem that local governments are currently seeing in other state agencies including law enforcement," Flannery said, adding that the bill does not remove a Kentucky resident’s ability to make requests as currently allowed.
Gracie Kelly of the Kentucky League of Cities said HB567 is modeled after Tennessee’s proof-of-residency law, and noted the statute would permit a government-issued ID or other documentation showing a Kentucky address. Chief Brian Taylor of the Lawrenceburg Police Department described practical burdens for small jurisdictions in vetting questionable requests and said verifying residency can impose costs on taxpayers.
Committee members raised access and implementation concerns. Representative Hodgson asked whether inspection and ID presentation could be handled remotely; witnesses said custodians could accept emailed photo ID at their discretion or require in-person verification. Representative Donworth asked whether requiring ID would be mandatory; witnesses responded the bill provides custodian discretion so checking ID is an option in practice and frequent, known requesters may not be required to present ID. The committee packet included a letter from the Kentucky Open Government Coalition opposing HB567.
The committee recorded 14 yea votes, 1 no vote and 3 pass votes; the chair announced HB567 passed with a favorable recommendation. The transcript does not record the precise operational rules a custodian would adopt in each office; the bill text and administrative guidance will determine implementation.