Police & Fire Retirees of Ohio, Inc. v. Police & Firemen's Disability & Pension Fund

• Decision Date: 17 July 1985
• Docket Number: Docket No. 84-1085
• Citation: 480 N.E.2d 482,18 OBR 289,18 Ohio St.3d 231
• Parties: , 18 O.B.R. 289 POLICE & FIRE RETIREES OF OHIO, INC. v. POLICE & FIREMEN'S DISABILITY & PENSION FUND et al.
• Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Page 231

18 Ohio St.3d 231

480 N.E.2d 482, 18 O.B.R. 289

POLICE & FIRE RETIREES OF OHIO, INC. v. POLICE & FIREMEN'S DISABILITY & PENSION FUND et al.

Docket No. 84-1085.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

July 17, 1985.

Robert M. Draper, Columbus, for relator.

Gurley, Rishel, Martin, Myers & Kopech, Thomas V. Martin and James R. Rishel, Columbus, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The first question before the court is whether the names and addresses of the Fund's members are public records within the meaning of R.C. 149.43(A)(1). If they are public records, R.C. 149.43(B) requires that the names and addresses be made available for public inspection. This court has enunciated a twofold test to determine the existence of public records: (1) the records must be kept by a governmental unit, and (2) the records must be specifically required to be kept by law. State, ex rel. Beauty Supply Co., v. State Bd. of Cosmetology (1977), 49 Ohio St.2d 245, 246, 361 N.E.2d 444 .

In fulfillment of the first requirement, the Fund can be characterized as a governmental unit. The Police & Firemen's Disability & Pension Fund was established by the General Assembly in R.C. Chapter 742 and its administration is governed by that chapter. Furthermore, R.C. 102.01(C) specifically defines a "public agency" as including "the five state retirement systems."

The second requirement of the Beauty Supply Co. "public records" test is also satisfied as respondents are specifically required by law to keep the records sought by relator. This court in Dayton Newspapers v. Dayton (1976), 45 Ohio St.2d 107, 341 N.E.2d 576 , held that a record is required to be kept for the purposes of R.C. 149.43 if that record is necessary for the governmental unit to execute its duties and responsibilities. While no specific statutory provision requires respondents to keep a file of the names and addresses of its members, R.C. 742.14 defines many of respondents' duties and responsibilities which would require that respondents keep a current list of the Fund's members and their addresses. Thus, according to Dayton Newspapers, the names and addresses of the Fund's members are specifically required to be kept by law. Since the Fund is a governmental unit, and since the records sought by relator are specifically required to be kept by law, those records are public records under R.C. 149.43 and subject to inspection by relator.

We further find that this court's decision in State, ex rel. Public Employees Retirees, v. PERS (1979), 60 Ohio St.2d 93, 397 N.E.2d 1191 , is applicable to the case at bar. The facts of that case are virtually identical to the facts in this case. In PERS an organization similar to relator wanted continued access to the names and addresses of the members of PERS for the purpose of soliciting members. PERS had been supplying those...