How often is an open records requester compelled to file an appeal with the Kentucky Attorney General to dislodge nonexempt public records from a recalcitrant public agency.

The attorney general does not, to the best of my knowledge, maintain statistics on the number of appeals "mooted" by disclosure of the records after an appeal is filed but before he renders an open records decision.

Enough, certainly, that in promulgating regulations governing the attorney general's handling of open records appeals in 1995, he included a regulation governing mootness:

"Section 6. Moot Complaints. If the requested documents are made available to the complaining party after a complaint is made, the Attorney General shall decline to issue a decision in the matter."

https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/kar/040/001/030.pdf

A few days ago WDRB reporter Marcus Green noted that a Transportation Cabinet report on the Ohio bridges tolling system — to which he was denied access because it was a "living document" — was released to him after he filed an appeal with the attorney general.

https://www.facebook.com/419650175248377/posts/505498009996926?sfns=mo

What percentage of appeals does the attorney general "moot?" It's safe to say that it is a small but statistically significant percentage.

And, as the linked article suggests, this is not a problem unique to Kentucky.

Certainly, we don't want to discourage an agency from reconsidering its argument for originally denying access to public records and settling the dispute before the attorney general renders a decision.

But the requester, the attorney general's open records staff, *and* the agency would be better served if the agency operated on the legislative and judicial presumption of openness rather than looking for ways to avoid accountability.