Request By:
Ms. Patty Arnett
57 Central Avenue
Salyersville, Ky 41465Mr. Charles Allen
Magoffin County Judge/Executive
P. O. Box 430
Salyersville, Ky 41465
Opinion
Opinion By: Chris Gorman, Attorney General; Amye B. Majors, Assistant Attorney General
OPEN RECORDS DECISION
This matter comes to the Attorney General on appeal from the actions of the Magoffin County Fiscal Court in responding to Ms. Patty Arnett's June 16, 1992, request to inspect various documents in the Court's possession. Specifically, Ms. Arnett requested access to:
1. The 8 most current quarterly reports for all county accounts.
2. Budgets for fiscal year 1990, 1991, 1992, and the current draft of fiscal year 1993;
3. Any other records that are concurrent or relevant to the records requested in one and two above.
In her letter of appeal to this office, Ms. Arnett indicates that as of the date of her appeal, she has recieved a copy of only one document, the budget for fiscal year 1993, and that she was charged $ 1.00 per page for that document. She further indicates that other Magoffin County residents have obtained records from the Fiscal Court free of charge. Although she has been advised that the records will be made available to her, she believes that the Fiscal Court, through its Finance Officer, Ms. Jenny Lou Caldwell, and its County Treasurer, Ms. Ruby Marshall, is engaging in delaying tactics.
Ms. Arnett asks that this Office review the actions of the Magoffin Fiscal Court to determine if those actions violated the Open Records Act. For the reasons set forth below, we conclude that the Fiscal Court violated the Act by failing to provide Ms. Arnett with timely access to the requested records, and by assessing an unreasonable copying charge.
With respect to the question of timely access, we believe that the Fiscal Court's response was improper under the reasoning announced in OAG 91-200 and OAG 92-35, copies of which are attached. Those opinions stand for the proposition that although a determination of what is a "reasonable time" for inspection turns on the particular facts presented, i.e., the breadth of the request and the number of documents it encompasses, public agencies must work in a spirit of cooperation with individuals who request to inspect their records to insure that those individuals are afforded timely access to the records they wish to inspect. We believe that under the facts presented in the present appeal, a delay of some twenty-eight working days is clearly unreasonable.
Turning to the second issue raised in this appeal, we find that the $ 1.00 per page copying charge assessed by the Magoffin County Fiscal Court was excessive, and that OAG 92-79, a copy of which is attached, is dispositive. Unless the Magoffin County Fiscal Court can establish that its actual cost for providing copies is $ 1.00 per page, it must recalculate its fees to conform to KRS 61.874(2). 1
The Magoffin County Fiscal Court may challenge this decision by initiating action in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and 61.882.
Footnotes
Footnotes