Request By:
[NO REQUESTBY IN ORIGINAL]
Opinion
Opinion By: Albert B. Chandler III, Attorney General; James M. Ringo, Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Decision
This matter comes to the Attorney General on appeal from the Franklin County Correctional Complex's actions relative to the open records request of Ty Evans, an inmate at the Complex, to inspect the institution's canteen account records.
In his letter of appeal, Mr. Evans states that he made two requests, one on May 29, 1998, requesting the annual canteen account report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1997, and another request on July 2, 1998, for the period ending June 30, 1998. He states that he received no response to his requests and he was unable to provide the Attorney General with a copy of his requests because, as an inmate, he was not allowed to make copies.
As authorized by KRS 61.880(2) and 40 KAR 1:030, Section 2, James Kemper, Jr., Jailer, Franklin County Correctional Complex, provided this office with a response to the issues raised in the letter of appeal. Mr. Kemper's letter indicates Mr. Evans was provided with a copy of the response. In his response, Mr. Kemper states, in part:
In reply to the above subject appeal, first Mr. Evans states he is "not allowed to make copies." This is not true, copies are available at a minimum fee. As to the main issue, I have not denied Mr. Evans' request for this information. The Franklin County Treasurer sent Mr. Evans the report for Fiscal Year 1996-97. Please be advised that I have also given Mr. Evans another copy of the Auditor's Report that pertains to the Jail Commissary account on this date (October 26, 1998). As to the request for 1998 records, these have not been finalized by the auditors.
We are asked to determine whether the actions of the Complex were consistent with the requirements of the Open Records Act. For the reasons that follow, we conclude that the actions of the agency were in substantial compliance with the Act.
We first address the failure of Mr. Evans to provide this office with copies of his open records requests. KRS 61.880(2)(a), in relevant part, provides:
If a complaining party wishes the Attorney General to review a public agency's denial of a request to inspect a public record, the complaining party shall forward to the Attorney General a copy of the written request and a copy of the written response denying inspection. If the public agency refuses to provide a written response, a complaining party shall provide a copy of the written request.
Mr. Evans argues in his letter of appeal that, as an inmate, he is not allowed to make copies. To the contrary, Mr. Kemper states in his response that inmates are allowed to make copies at a minimum fee. We have no reason to doubt the agency's assertion. The fact that Mr. Evans is an inmate does not excuse him from meeting the procedural requirement of providing this office with a copy of his open records requests. A copy of the request enables this office to identify the specific records requested and to evaluate the adequacy of an agency's response to that request.
However, in light of the instant circumstances, we will assume that Mr. Evans's letter of appeal correctly identifies the records he requested and we proceed to address the adequacy of the Complex's response.
KRS 61.880(1) requires that an agency respond to an open records request in writing within three business days after its receipt. To the extent the Complex failed to do this, its action would constitute a procedural violation of the Open Records Act. However, this procedural deficiency is mitigated by the agency's subsequent action in providing Mr. Evans with one of the records he requested and informing him that the other record which he requested was not yet completed.
As noted above, Mr. Kemper's response to the letter of appeal indicates that he did not deny Mr. Evans's request. Mr. Evans was provided with a copy of the Auditor's Report that pertains to the Jail Commissary account for Fiscal Year 1996-97. In fact, the response indicated that the Franklin County Treasurer had also provided Mr. Evans with a copy of this record. Mr. Kemper further advised that the Auditor's Report for Fiscal Year 1997-98 had not been finalized by the auditors.
40 KAR 1:030, Section 6. Moot Complaints, provides:
If the requested documents are made to the complaining party after a complaint is made, the Attorney General shall decline to issue a decision in the matter.
Thus, the appeal is moot as to the Auditor's Report for Fiscal Year 1996-97, as Mr. Evans was provided with a copy of this record. As to the request for a copy of the Auditor's Report for Fiscal Year 1997-98, that document had not been completed at the time of Mr. Evans's request and was therefore not available for inspection. See 93-ORD-55. Accordingly, it is our decision that the response of the Franklin County Correction Complex to Mr. Evan's open records requests was in substantial compliance with the Open Records Act.
A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it 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 in circuit court, but should not be named as a party in that action or in any subsequent proceeding.