NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
93-ORD-14
February 7, 1994
In Re: Rose Dagirmanjian, Ph.D/ University of Louisville, University Archives and Records Center
OPEN RECORDS DECISION
This matter comes to the Attorney General as an apparent appeal by Rose Dagirmanjian, Ph.D., as a result of her attempts to obtain copies of records from the Archives and Records Center of the University of Louisville.
Dr. Dagirmanjian, in a request dated July 1, 1993, sought access to two specifically identified documents. William J. Morison, Ph.D., Director of the Archives and Records Center, in a letter to Dr. Dagirmanjian, dated July 12, 1993, furnished the documents requested.
Dr. Dagirmanjian advised Dr. Morison on July 15, 1993, that copies of certain attachments to the requested letters had not been furnished. In a letter to Dr. Dagirmanjian, dated July 16, 1993, Ms. Margaret Merrick, Acting Director of the Archives and Records Center, advised that "the complete report" had been sent to Dr. Dagirmanjian's attorney. Ms. Merrick further advised that copies of the attachments would be provided to Dr. Dagirmanjian upon receipt of her payment of $29.75 (119 pages at $.25 per page).
In her letter to this office bringing to the attention of the Attorney General "several irregular actions" by the University of Louisville, Dr. Dagirmanjian first complains of the tone of Ms. Merrick's letter to her. Dr. Dagirmanjian maintains that the letter introduces a biased, adversarial tone toward her request and reveals privileged information. She also objects to the payment of 25 cents per page for photocopying, maintaining that she should be charged 5 cents per page.
In dealing with the second matter relative to costs charged for copying, the attention of the parties is directed to KRS 61.874(2) which states:
The public agency may prescribe a reasonable fee for making copies of public records which shall not exceed the actual cost not including the cost of staff required.
This office has consistently recognized that a public agency may prescribe a reasonable fee for making copies which may not exceed the actual cost it incurs, not including the cost of staff required. In Friend v. Rees, Ky.App., 696 S.W.2d 325 (1985), the court held that ten cents per page was a reasonable reproduction fee under the Open Records Act. Unless the University of Louisville can demonstrate that its actual cost for providing copies is 25 cents per page, based on the factors set forth in KRS 61.874(2), it must recalculate its copying fee to conform to the statutory requirements. See 93-ORD-4 and OAG 92-79, copies of which are enclosed.
As to Dr. Dagirmanjian's other complaint, we can merely respond by stating that while there are substantive violations of the Open Records Act and procedural violations of that Act, there are no provisions dealing with "tone violations." We would expect the response from the public agency to not only be prompt but also to be polite and courteous. However, after reviewing the record in this case we can only conclude that the "tone" of the response does not constitute a substantive or procedural violation of the Open Records Act.
Either party to this appeal may challenge this decision by initiating action in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882. Pursuant to KRS 61.880(3), the Attorney General should be notified of any action filed in the circuit court, but he shall not be named as a party in that action or in any subsequent proceedings.
CHRIS GORMAN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
Thomas R. Emerson
Assistant Attorney General
(502) 564-7600
res/1224
Enclosure
Copies of this decision
have been mailed to:
Rose Dagirmanjian, Ph.D.
Professor, Department of
Pharmacology and Toxicology
School of Medicine
University of Louisville
Louisville, Kentucky 40292
Ms. Margaret Merrick
University Archives and Records Center
Ekstrom Library
University of Louisville
Louisville, Kentucky 40292