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 Office of the Lincoln County Attorney violated the Open Records Act in failing to respond to Marvin Phipps' open records request for copies of seven criminal complaints he had filed with the Office of the Lincoln County Attorney in 2006. We conclude that the failure of the agency to respond to Mr. Phipps' request constituted a violation of the Act.
Having received no response to his request, Mr. Phipps initiated this open records appeal. On August 10, 2007, the Attorney General sent a copy of Mr. Phipps' letter of appeal, along with our notification of receipt of open records appeal, to the Office of the Lincoln 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 agency has taken relative to Mr. Phipps' appeal.
The agency's failure to respond to Mr. Phipps' 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 agency had not one, but two, opportunities to comply with KRS 61.880(1), by responding to Mr. Phipps' original request, and by responding to his request upon receipt of this office's notification of appeal. The agency failed to do so.
Because the agency did not respond to Mr. Phipps' 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 agency'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 Office of the Lincoln County Attorney should immediately respond to Mr. Phipps' 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. Phipps wants copies of the requested records, the agency 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 are responsive to Mr. Phipps' request, the agency must affirmatively so advise Mr. Phipps 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 Office of the County Attorney must ascertain whether records exist which are responsive to Mr. Phipps' request and, if it has not already done so, promptly advise him of its findings.