The Kentucky Attorney General issued the following open records and open meetings decisions last week:
1. 23-ORD-077 (In re: Mark Payne/Northern Kentucky University)
Summary: Northern Kentucky University did not violate the Open Records Act when it withheld entirely emails that are exempt under the Act.
https://www.ag.ky.gov/Resources/orom/2023-OROM/2023/23-ORD-077.pdf
2. 23-OMD-078 (In re: Daniel Konstantopoulos/Winchester-Clark County Industrial Development Authority)
Summary: The Winchester-Clark County Industrial Development Authority did not violate the Open Meetings Act when it discussed a specific proposal from a business entity in closed session under KRS 61.810(1)(g). The Authority was not required to state the reason for the closed session in detail because KRS 61.815(2) exempts discussions under KRS 61.810(1)(g) from the requirements of KRS 61.815(1). The Authority did not violate KRS 61.835 with regard to the recording of actions taken because it took no action in closed session.
https://www.ag.ky.gov/Resources/orom/2023-OROM/2023/23-OMD-078.pdf
3. 23-ORD-079 (In re: David McAnally/Cabinet for Health and Family Services)
Summary: The Cabinet for Health and Family Services subverted the intent of the Open Records Act, within the meaning of KRS 61.880(4), when it did not respond to a request within five business days, and when it invoked KRS 61.872(5) but failed to give a detailed explanation of the reason for delay and failed to dispense with the request on the date by which it had said records would be available for inspection.
https://www.ag.ky.gov/Resources/orom/2023-OROM/2023/23-ORD-079.pdf
4. 23-ORD-080 (In re: Kelly Reynolds/Justice and Public Safety Cabinet)
Summary: The Justice and Public Safety Cabinet did not violate the Open Records Act when it did not provide records that do not exist.
https://www.ag.ky.gov/Resources/orom/2023-OROM/2023/23-ORD-080.pdf
5. 23-ORD-081 (In re: Christopher Joyner/Murray Independent School District)
Summary: The Murray Independent School District violated the Open Records Act when it denied a request to inspect emails without explaining how the claimed exemptions apply to them. It also violated the Act when it failed to respond to one part of a request. However, the District did not violate the Act when it denied a request for it to create a record.
https://www.ag.ky.gov/Resources/orom/2023-OROM/2023/23-ORD-081.pdf
6. 23-ORD-082 (In re: Darrin Hardy/City of Ludlow)
Summary: The City of Ludlow did not violate the Open Records Act when it did not provide records that do not exist.
https://www.ag.ky.gov/Resources/orom/2023-OROM/2023/23-ORD-082.pdf
