Here’s a follow-up on a story we told you about yesterday in which LEO’s open records request for documents pertaining to the creation of a Metro Government anonymous tips line. The Jefferson County attorney’s office denied the LEO request, saying the documents were preliminary and therefore not covered by open records.

LEO editor Stephen George disagreed and filed a complaint with the attorney general’s office. We obtained a copy of the complaint through open records. In it, George claims LEO was singled out by Chad Carlton, the Mayor’s spokesman. From the complaint:

In two separate conversations, the first occurring March 18 (in person) and the second March 23 (on the phone), Chad Carlton, chief communications officer for Louisville Mayor Jerry Abramson, told me his office had recommended to the county attorney’s office that LEO not receive the documents because he does not “trust” us. The first time he said it he was specifically speaking about LEO reporter Phillip M. Bailey, who wrote a story for which we were trying to obtain the aforementioned documents. The second time he included me with Mr. Bailey as people he does not “trust” with such documents.

George, who said he met at length with Carlton after the original story broke last week, says the denial is a violation of the First Amendment. Here’s more from the complaint:

Both of these conversations took place after the story – which was critical of the mayor’s office was published. The context of both conversations I had with Mr. Carlton was his unhappiness over the tone and message of the story. Importantly, I asked Mr. Carlton again, once the story was published and I knew his reaction to it, to offer LEO access to the documents. This is when he told me for the second time, during a phone conversation March 23, that he did not “trust” me to know what to do with them — implying, therefore, that the newspaper would not be granted access to public records because of the way we had handled a story critical of Mayor Abramson’s office.

So now the Mayor’s office is responsible for denying open record requests based not on the content of the material requested, but the probability that an unfavorable story will be written? Or is it just whether or not the Mayor’s Office trusts the requesting media outlet? Does this worry you?