OREM, Utah — The director of Utah’s Government Records Office ruled Thursday that any security plans for the Turning Point USA event at Utah Valley University, where Charlie Kirk was shot and killed last year, are not public records and should not be released to the public.
The ruling follows months of back and forth between the University and FOX 13 Investigative Reporter Nate Carlisle, who requested a copy of the plan for the on-campus event the day after the shooting. Utah Valley University had denied release of the records, arguing that documents related to security measures are not subject to disclosure under the state’s Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA).
During the hearing Thursday, Carlisle argued that the records should be considered public and that there was a significant public interest weighing in favor of disclosing them. Releasing the plans, he wrote in briefings, would promote transparency and help the public assess whether security planning was proportionate and appropriate.
“Outside the opposing parties represented here today, I have not encountered a single person who does not want to know what the plan was on Sept. 10,” Carlisle said during the hearing.
Lonny Pehrson, director of the Utah Government Records Office, acknowledged a “very heightened public interest in disclosure of such records.” But he ultimately sided with Utah Valley University, finding that his office lacked authority under open records laws to “order release of these records.”
In addition to its assertion that the records were not public, the University also argued before the ruling that the security plans should not be disclosed because their release could compromise the safety of future school events.
The documents may “reveal or compromise continuing or repeatable security measures” and could “expose patterns, preferences, or operational gaps that compromise the effectiveness of future security efforts,” the University argued in filings.
“If you’re releasing past plans, they could inform what could be happening in future plans,” Nicole Ferguson, an attorney arguing on behalf of Utah Valley University, said Thursday.
Carlisle countered that the plans should be considered historical records, unrelated to ongoing or future security measures at the school.
“Whatever the plans were for Sept. 10, I think it’s reasonable to assume they will not be applied to future events at UVU,” he said.
Because the plans relate to an event “that is the subject of ongoing criminal investigations and proceedings,” the University also contended that dissemination of the records “could interfere with those efforts by revealing details relevant to the investigation or prosecution.”
Attorneys for Tyler Robinson, Kirk’s alleged shooter, made similar arguments in a motion intervening before the Government Records Office in opposition to release of the records. They argued that public access “would interfere with multiple criminal investigations.”
Carlisle noted that he did not ask “for any records mentioning Tyler Robinson, nor has anyone told me the records list his name.”
“I don’t know why the plans for the rally would be impacting an investigation at this point, more than five months after the events of Sept. 10,” he added.
Attorneys for Robinson, who could face the death penalty, countered that public disclosure of the plans could compromise his right to a fair trial.
“The fact that documents don’t specifically mention Mr. Robinson isn’t really dispositive of whether the records have a potential to influence the jury pool if they’re, what I would say, prematurely released,” said Richard Novak, an attorney representing Robinson.
While the documents ultimately won’t be provided to the public, Carlisle noted that many outstanding questions remain from that day – including whether the University followed its own plans, if any personnel were corrected or disciplined “for actions or inactions that day” and what changes the University has made “so this won’t happen again.”