Metro council members and citizens expressed opposition to a new Louisville Metro Police Department contract term providing for destruction of "informal complaints" after two years at last night's Metro Council meeting.
Several individuals voiced concern about the threat to accountability posed by premature destruction of "informal complaints" — a term that has not been publicly defined.
The Courier Journal reports:
"Some who spoke against the contract on Thursday cited concerns that provisions around destroying informal complaints after two years would impede the department's ability to put in place a robust early warning system.
"Chief Erika Shields told council members earlier Thursday that she didn't believe the contract would hinder its implementation, adding it was a major goal of hers, but [Metro Council member Cassie Chambers] Armstrong disagreed.
"'Sunshine is the best disinfectant,' Armstrong said. 'If people need more training or need more assistance or need more information on how to do their jobs to the best of their ability ⦠we need information before us.'
"I do believe — I hope I'm wrong — but I do believe this provision will be an impediment to implementing an early warning system down the road."
From our perspective, the contract term providing for destruction of "informal complaints" after two years may not only be an impediment to accountability, it may also violate state law governing destruction of local, and in particular, Metro Louisville Police Department, complaints.
Public records retention schedules must be approved by the Libraries, Archives, and Records Commission under state law. Each records schedule is promulgated into administrative regulation.
https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=48228
The applicable schedule for local governments generally — and Louisville Metro's police department specifically — require that "formal complaints" be retained for five years after the law enforcement officer leaves employment.
https://kdla.ky.gov/records/recretentionschedules/Documents/Local%20Rec… (See Series L4705)
https://kdla.ky.gov/records/recretentionschedules/Documents/Local%20Rec… (See Series L5123)
Neither the General Schedule for Local Government nor the specific schedule for Louisville Metro Government recognizes a separate, shorter retention period for "informal complaints."
In other words, there is no records series whatsoever for "informal complaints."
This is due, at least in part, to the courts' rejection of agency "attempt[s] to categorize complaints as formal public complaints and private individual complaints" for records access purposes.
https://casetext.com/case/kentucky-st-bd-of-med-v-courier-journal
This does not create a void for local agencies to fill. In fact, a public record that has not been scheduled by the Libraries, Archives, and Records Commission must be retained until it is scheduled and the new scheduled retention period has expired.
It is, in essence, a permanent record until it is scheduled by the Commission.
It's unclear on what legal theory Louisville Metro believes it can establish its own "records series" for "informal complaints" without first going through the records scheduling process required under Chapter 171 of the Kentucky Revised Statutes and administrative regulation.
https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/kar/title725.htm
https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/kar/725/001/030.pdf
The contract term approved by Metro Council is not only a threat to accountability and a retreat from Metro Government's commitment to enhanced transparency, it may, in fact, violate state laws governing records management and retention.
No big deal?
Check out the penalty provisions found in KRS Chapter 171 and the criminal statute relating to tampering with a public record.
https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=48228
https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=19864
