The Kentucky Attorney General issued the following open records and open meetings decisions last week:
1. 23-ORD-050 (In re: Carlos Harris/Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex)
Summary: This Office cannot find that the Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex violated the Open Records Act when it provided what the Appellant considers to be records different than those he requested.
2. 23-ORD-051 (In re: Alex Burdette/Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex)
Summary: The Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex did not violate the Open Records Act when it denied a request for a record that does not contain a specific reference to the requesting inmate.
3. 23-ORD-052 (In re: Denise Steenbergen/Cabinet for Health and Family Services)
Summary: The Cabinet for Health and Family Services violated the Open Records Act when it did not determine within five business days of receiving a request to inspect records whether to grant or deny it and notify the requester of its decision. The Cabinet also failed to carry its burden to establish that KRS 61.878(1)(a) permitted the redactions it made to responsive records because it did not describe what material was redacted or explain how the privacy interests were implicated by the records.
4. 23-OMD-053 (In re: Deena Thomas/City of Muldraugh)
Summary: The City of Muldraugh violated the Open Meetings Act when it failed to respond to a complaint within three business days after receiving it. The City also violated the Act by holding a series of less-than-quorum meetings for the purpose of avoiding the requirements of KRS 61.810(1). However, the City did not violate the notice requirements of the Act when it posted notice of its special meeting on social media the same day as that meeting because the Act does not require notice of a special meeting to be posted on a public agency’s social media accounts.