On May 7, the Kentucky Public Pension Authority filed a Response in Opposition to the Motion to Preserve Documents filed by Tier 3 Intervenors in MAYBERRY, et al., v.
KKR & CO., L.P., et al. — the Franklin Circuit Court case which Bluegrass Politics recently dubbed the "never-ending lawsuit over the Kentucky pension system's controversial hedge fund investments."
KPPA's argument opposing the Tier 3 Intervenors' motion to preserve documents is primarily based on the intervenors' lack of standing.
But KPPA also vigorously argues that the motion to preserve documents, and for access to the highly anticipated Calcaterra investigative report, is "unnecessary."
"Kentucky law," attorneys argue, "already obligates KPPA and its representatives to preserve information related to this Action. Likewise, Kentucky's Open Records Act obligates KPPA to permit public examination of non-exempt records, such as the Investigation Report, so there is no need for an order here either."
KPPA characterizes the motion as "a decoy" for the Tier 3 Intervenors' "disingenuous attempt to discredit and scandalize KPPA's
investigation and to pressure the Court into granting their motion to intervene."
While the Tier 3 Intervenors' Motion to Preserve is indeed rife with details that call into question the qualifications of KPPA's investigator, Regina Calcettera, and the manner of her selection under state procurement laws, the Tier 3 Intervenors' motion is grounded in the reality that the records of public agencies into which investigations are launched have often been known to go missing — notwithstanding records retention requirements suspending destruction of public records while litigation is pending — often without consequence.
https://casetext.com/regulation/kentucky-administrative-regulations/tit…
Last year, for example, The Courier Journal sued the Louisville Metro Police Department alleging LMPD broke the law when it deliberately removed 750,000 responsive records from its servers during a pending open records appeal and when it "engaged in over a year of meritless and evasive litigation tactics designed to frustrate The Courier Journal's access."
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/crime/2020/12/24/courier-jou…
Earlier in the year, the Finance and Administrative Cabinet sued former attorneys in the Bevin administration for the return of pardon records which were removed by the attorneys "despite the circumstances of these pardons being subject to both a federal investigation requested by [the Attorney General] and the Finance Secretary's state investigation."
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2020/07/22/gov-besh…
And amidst the 2014 sexual harassment investigation into allegations leveled against lawmakers, the Kentucky State Police investigated document shredding by former Legislative Research Commission Director Robert Sherman — days after his resignation — as well as allegations that he deleted the contents of his computer.
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/ky-legislature/2014…
Clearly, unauthorized destruction of public records — whether by shredding, deletion, or removal from public agency premises — is not uncommon.
It can be argued that the seriousness of the reports about Calcaterra, and the questionable circumstances of her selection, justify the Tier 3 Intervenors' motion to preserve documents and were an integral part of the motion.
As for the Tier 3 Intervenors' motion for an order "ensuring that they receive copies of the Investigation Report," KPPA is quick to dismiss "this, too, as unneeded."
KPPA acknowledges that it is subject to the Open Records Act and required to make all non-exempt records available to the public.
But KPPA is quick to note that it "reserves all rights available to it with respect to any such Open Records Act request. This includes, but is not limited to, the exemption for preliminary records, attorney-client communications, and attorney work-product. See KRS 61.878(1)(i) & (j); KRE 503; CR 26.02."
If ever there were any doubt, KPPA makes clear it's intention to withhold, in whole or in part, the investigative report for which Kentucky's taxpayers paid $1.2 million.
However the issue of standing is resolved, KPPA should think twice before cynically suggesting that the Tier 3 Intevenors' alone have ulterior motives. without consequence.
https://casetext.com/regulation/kentucky-administrative-regulations/tit…
Last year, for example, The Courier Journal sued the Louisville Metro Police Department alleging LMPD broke the law when it deliberately removed 750,000 responsive records from its servers during a pending open records appeal and when it "engaged in over a year of meritless and evasive litigation tactics designed to frustrate The Courier Journal's access."
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/crime/2020/12/24/courier-jou…
Earlier in the year, the Finance and Administrative Cabinet sued former attorneys in the Bevin administration for the return of pardon records which were removed by the attorneys "despite the circumstances of these pardons being subject to both a federal investigation requested by [the Attorney General] and the Finance Secretary's state investigation."
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2020/07/22/gov-besh…
And amidst the 2014 sexual harassment investigation into allegations leveled against lawmakers, the Kentucky State Police investigated document shredding by former Legislative Research Commission Director Robert Sherman — days after his resignation — as well as allegations that he deleted the contents of his computer.
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/ky-legislature/2014…
Clearly, unauthorized destruction of public records — whether by shredding, deletion, or removal from public agency premises — is not uncommon.
It can be argued that the seriousness of the reports about Calcaterra, and the questionable circumstances of her selection, justify the Tier 3 Intervenors' motion to preserve documents and were an integral part of the motion.
As for the Tier 3 Intervenors' motion for an order "ensuring that they receive copies of the Investigation Report," KPPA is quick to dismiss "this, too, as unneeded."
KPPA acknowledges that it is subject to the Open Records Act and required to make all non-exempt records available to the public.
But KPPA is quick to note that it "reserves all rights available to it with respect to any such Open Records Act request. This includes, but is not limited to, the exemption for preliminary records, attorney-client communications, and attorney work-product. See KRS 61.878(1)(i) & (j); KRE 503; CR 26.02."
If ever there were any doubt, KPPA makes clear it's intention to withhold, in whole or in part, the investigative report for which Kentucky's taxpayers paid $1.2 million.
However the issue of standing is resolved, KPPA should think twice before cynically suggesting that the Tier 3 Intevenors' alone have ulterior motives. destruction of public records while litigation is pending — often without consequence.
https://casetext.com/regulation/kentucky-administrative-regulations/tit…
Last year, for example, The Courier Journal sued the Louisville Metro Police Department alleging LMPD broke the law when it deliberately removed 750,000 responsive records from its servers during a pending open records appeal and when it "engaged in over a year of meritless and evasive litigation tactics designed to frustrate The Courier Journal's access."
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/crime/2020/12/24/courier-jou…
Earlier in the year, the Finance and Administrative Cabinet sued former attorneys in the Bevin administration for the return of pardon records which were removed by the attorneys "despite the circumstances of these pardons being subject to both a federal investigation requested by [the Attorney General] and the Finance Secretary's state investigation."
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2020/07/22/gov-besh…
And amidst the 2014 sexual harassment investigation into allegations leveled against lawmakers, the Kentucky State Police investigated document shredding by former Legislative Research Commission Director Robert Sherman — days after his resignation — as well as allegations that he deleted the contents of his computer.
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/ky-legislature/2014…
Clearly, unauthorized destruction of public records — whether by shredding, deletion, or removal from public agency premises — is not uncommon.
It can be argued that the seriousness of the reports about Calcaterra, and the questionable circumstances of her selection, justify the Tier 3 Intervenors' motion to preserve documents and were an integral part of the motion.
As for the Tier 3 Intervenors' motion for an order "ensuring that they receive copies of the Investigation Report," KPPA is quick to dismiss "this, too, as unneeded."
KPPA acknowledges that it is subject to the Open Records Act and required to make all non-exempt records available to the public.
But KPPA is quick to note that it "reserves all rights available to it with respect to any such Open Records Act request. This includes, but is not limited to, the exemption for preliminary records, attorney-client communications, and attorney work-product. See KRS 61.878(1)(i) & (j); KRE 503; CR 26.02."
If ever there were any doubt, KPPA makes clear it's intention to withhold, in whole or in part, the investigative report for which Kentucky's taxpayers paid $1.2 million.
However the issue of standing is resolved, KPPA should think twice before cynically suggesting that the Tier 3 Intevenors' alone have ulterior motives. destruction of public records while litigation is pending — often without consequence.
https://casetext.com/regulation/kentucky-administrative-regulations/tit…
Last year, for example, The Courier Journal sued the Louisville Metro Police Department alleging LMPD broke the law when it deliberately removed 750,000 responsive records from its servers during a pending open records appeal and when it "engaged in over a year of meritless and evasive litigation tactics designed to frustrate The Courier Journal's access."
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/crime/2020/12/24/courier-jou…
Earlier in the year, the Finance and Administrative Cabinet sued former attorneys in the Bevin administration for the return of pardon records which were removed by the attorneys "despite the circumstances of these pardons being subject to both a federal investigation requested by [the Attorney General] and the Finance Secretary's state investigation."
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2020/07/22/gov-besh…
And amidst the 2014 sexual harassment investigation into allegations leveled against lawmakers, the Kentucky State Police investigated document shredding by former Legislative Research Commission Director Robert Sherman — days after his resignation — as well as allegations that he deleted the contents of his computer.
https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/ky-legislature/2014…
Clearly, unauthorized destruction of public records — whether by shredding, deletion, or removal from public agency premises — is not uncommon.
It can be argued that the seriousness of the reports about Calcaterra, and the questionable circumstances of her selection, justify the Tier 3 Intervenors' motion to preserve documents and were an integral part of the motion.
As for the Tier 3 Intervenors' motion for an order "ensuring that they receive copies of the Investigation Report," KPPA is quick to dismiss "this, too, as unneeded."
KPPA acknowledges that it is subject to the Open Records Act and required to make all non-exempt records available to the public.
But KPPA is quick to note that it "reserves all rights available to it with respect to any such Open Records Act request. This includes, but is not limited to, the exemption for preliminary records, attorney-client communications, and attorney work-product. See KRS 61.878(1)(i) & (j); KRE 503; CR 26.02."
If ever there were any doubt, KPPA makes clear it's intention to withhold, in whole or in part, the investigative report for which Kentucky's taxpayers paid $1.2 million.
However the issue of standing is resolved, KPPA should think twice before cynically suggesting that the Tier 3 Intevenors' alone have ulterior motives.
