Request By:
Samuel K. Warner, # 188516
CCA/Lee Adjustment Center
P. O. Box 900
Beattyville, KY 41311-0900Barbara Friends
Records Department
Three Forks Regional Jail
2475 Center Street
Beattyville, KY 41311Arthur Noe
Lee County Jailer
P. O. Box 886
Beattyville, KY 41311Thomas Jones
Lee County Attorney
P. O. Box Drawer 0
Beattyville, KY 41311
Opinion
Opinion By: Gregory D. Stumbo, Attorney General; James M. Ringo, Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Decision
The question presented in this appeal is whether the Three Forks Regional Jail (Jail) violated the Open Records Act in failing to respond to Samuel K. Warner's open records request for copies of records concerning visits made to him by his attorney at the jail. We conclude that the failure of the jail to respond to Mr. Warner's request constituted a violation of the Act
Having received no response to his request, Mr. Warner initiated this open records appeal. On January 20, 2006, the Attorney General sent a copy of Mr. Warner's letter of appeal, along with our notification of receipt of open records appeal, to the Jail and the Lee County Attorney. Although that notification clearly states that pursuant to 40 KAR 1:030 Section 2, "the agency may respond to this appeal," we received no response to our notification, and have not been advised what, if any, action the Jail has taken relative to Mr. Warner's appeal.
The Jail's failure to respond to Mr. Warner's request in a proper and timely fashion constitutes a violation of KRS 61.880(1). That statute provides:
Each public agency, upon any request for records made under KRS 61.870 to 61.884, shall determine within three (3) days, excepting Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays, after the receipt of any such request whether to comply with the request and shall notify in writing the person making the request, within the three (3) day period, of its decision. An agency response denying, in whole or in part, inspection of any record shall include a statement of the specific exception authorizing the withholding of the record and a brief explanation of how the exception applies to the record withheld. The response shall be issued by the official custodian or under his authority, and it shall constitute final agency action.
The Jail had not one, but two, opportunities to comply with KRS 61.880(1), by responding to Mr. Warner's original request, and by responding to his request upon receipt of this office's notification of appeal. The Jail failed to do so.
Because the Jail did not respond to Mr. Warner's request, or this office's notification of appeal, it advanced no legal basis for denying that request. Pursuant to KRS 61.880(2)(c), "the burden of proof in sustaining the action shall rest with the agency . . . ." The Jail's failure to respond to the open records request is tantamount to a denial of that request without specific support in the form of "a statement of the specific exception authorizing the withholding of the record and a brief explanation of how the exception applies to the record withheld. " KRS 61.880(1). 02-ORD-116. Accordingly, the Jail should immediately respond to Mr. Warner's request or otherwise make the records available for his inspection, unless the agency can meet its burden of proof by articulating a basis for denying access under the exceptions set out in KRS 61.878(1). 1 If Mr. Warner wants copies of the requested records, the Jail may require prepayment for copies, not to exceed ten cents per page.
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 proceedings.
Footnotes
Footnotes
1 If no records exist which areresponsive to Mr. Warner's request, the Jail must affirmatively so advise Mr. Warner in writing. On this issue, the Attorney General has consistently held:
[A]n agency's inability to produce records due to their nonexistence is tantamount to a denial and . . . it is incumbent on the agency to so state in clear and direct terms. 01-ORD-38, p. 9 [citations omitted]. While it is obvious that an agency cannot furnish that which it does not have or which does not exist, a written response that does not so state is deficient. [Citations omitted.]
02-ORD-144, p. 3; 03-ORD-207. Accordingly, the Jail must ascertain whether records exist which are responsive to Mr. Warner's request and promptly advise him of its findings.