Plaintiff Jordan White today filed a motion to compel the Kentucky Public Pension Authority to comply with the Franklin Circuit Court’s August 25 Opinion and Order in Jordan White v Kentucky Public Pension Authority.
In addition to granting White’s Motion for Summary Judgment in the open records case — requiring KPPA to produce the $1.2 million taxpayer funded Calcaterra Pollack — the Court ordered KPPA to “provide, within 30 days [of the August 25 opinion and order], an Index of the related documents requested, including an Affidavit from the appropriate official of KPPA describing their contents and an explanation for why they were withheld.”
KPPA elected to ignore the deadline for the Index which fell on September 26. White received nothing from KPPA. Nor has there been any indication that KPPA requested an extension of time or filed a motion with the court for relief from the deadline.
White’s Motion to Compel asks the Franklin Circuit Court to order KPPA “to comply fully with the Court’s Order immediately and with no further delay.”
It includes these hitherto unknown facts:
“The Index and Affidavit contemplated by the Order were due on or before September
26, 2022. On September 1, 2022, Plaintiff emailed counsel for KPPA and advised that ‘[i]f
KPPA agrees to timely produce the Calcaterra Report to Plaintiff by September 6, without further delay or motion practice, Plaintiff is willing to confer with KPPA regarding a reasonable extension of time to complete the index.’ KPPA’s counsel replied the following day, stating that KPPA ‘intends to release the report no later than Tuesday September 6’ and that ‘KPPA will need an extension of the 30 days provided for in Judge Shepherd’s Order to produce an index.’”
KPPA counsel Sarah Bishop expressed her “hope that we can discuss what that extension will look like early next week.”
Continuing, White’s Motion recounts:
“On September 6, 2022, KPPA timely produced the Report. But KPPA’s counsel did not follow up on the extension ‘early’ that week. In fact, eight days passed before Plaintiff heard back from KPPA’s counsel. On September 14, 2022, Ms. Bishop emailed Plaintiff, asking him to ‘[p]lease let us know your thoughts on the below-referenced extension as soon as possible.” Plaintiff replied less than two hours later, advising ‘[w]e are happy to consider a reasonable request for an extension of time, but KPPA has not made a specific request. If KPPA makes a specific request with a reasoned basis and explanation for the further delay, we will consider it.”
“Negotiations” thereafter abruptly ended.
“Neither Ms. Bishop nor any other counsel for KPPA ever responded to Plaintiff’s email. They simply let the Court-ordered 30-day deadline come and go without action.”
White’s motion also asks the Franklin Circuit Court “to find KPPA in contempt of its August 25 Order, order KPPA to produce the Index and Affidavit within three days, and award Plaintiff costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees, incurred for having to move this Court to tell KPPA to do what it already should have done and that the Court had ordered it to do.”
No less than the public’s right of access to these public records — which White originally requested — rests in the balance:
• records concerning the “Personal Service Contract” for “Legal Investigative Services” between the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the KRS and the Calcaterra Pollack, LLC effective November 23, 2020 through September 30, 2021, including the “detailed report,”* the summary report, all drafts of the detailed and summary reports, and “any other report, record or presentation generated as a result of Calcaterra’s investigation of ‘specific investment activities conducted’ by KRS; and
• communications between the KPPA/KRS and any other party concerning: the “Personal Services Contract” for “Legal Investigative Services” by and between the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the KRS and Calcaterra Pollack relating to the reports described above.
Adding insult to injury, the taxpayers will bear the cost of KPPA’s recalcitrance if the court grants White’s request for attorneys’ fees and costs — a financial burden that could have been avoided if KPPA had complied with the court’s order.
And if nothing else, a finding of contempt should compel a change in KPPA leadership.
*KPPA released the fact based investigative report on September 6 (though some, including the court, have question just how “detailed” it is) but withheld Legal Recommendations per the court’s order.
