A Butler County judge is considering the county’s appeal of a state Office of Open Records determination ordering the county to release inmates names to a faith-based Mercer County drug and alcohol recovery center.

Following oral arguments Wednesday, Aug. 5, Judge Kelley Streib said she will either remand the case back to the Open Records office, if she has the authority to, or issue a decision.

The suit centers around a broader state Right-to-Know law request from Hope Center Ministries in Greenville seeking inmate commitment and release dates in addition to names filed Feb 18.

The county denied the request March 25, saying the information is confidential under the state Criminal History Record Information Act (CHRIA) and protected under the constitutional right to privacy.

Hope Center Ministries and its director, Justin Reynolds, appealed the decision to the Office of Open Records. The office issued a final determination June 2 ruling commitment and release dates are protected under the Criminal History Record Information Act, but inmates’ names are not.

At Wednesday’s hearing, county solicitor Julie Graham cited the Pennsylvania Supreme Court case Mezzacappa v. Northampton County as a precedent that found inmate mug shots are identifiable descriptions only police are allowed to publicly release. She argued if mug shots, commitment and release dates are not public information as identifiable descriptions, inmates names should be considered identifiable descriptions as well.

“I can’t think of a more identifiable descriptor,” Graham said.

Graham noted the state and some county prisons have inmate lookup tools, but Butler County does not and is not required to. She pointed out federal inmates are held in the county jail, but federal law prohibits the release of their names. In addition, the county holds inmates for other counties, which could object to release of those inmates’ names. The jail also houses confidential informants, cooperating witnesses and others being held for their own protection, she said.

She also argued the county would have to create a document that does not currently exist — a list of inmate names — which would not be accurate due to normal inmate turnover. The Right-to-Know law does not require creation of documents that don’t exist to fill a request.

She said she will submit an affidavit from Warden Beau Sneddon that will describe how the list would have to be created and what information would have to be redacted.

She noted former inmates whose charges were dropped or who had their records expunged could get passed over for a job if such a list were obtained by a potential employer.

“CHRIA requires us to avoid that,” Graham said, noting violating the Criminal History Record Information Act would expose the county to legal liability.

Reynolds appeared without an attorney and didn’t present legal arguments, but asked the court to uphold the final determination. He said the goal of the Right-to-Know Law request is to help inmates.