Opinion
Opinion By: Gregory D. Stumbo, Attorney General; Michelle D. Harrison, Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Decision
At issue in this appeal is whether Blackburn Correctional Complex violated the Kentucky Open Records Act in denying the request of Michael Squires for various documents relating to the contract with Aramark Correctional Services, Inc. and its operation of the Inmate Canteen at BCC. Because any existing records which are responsive to Mr. Squires' request do not contain a specific reference to him, BCC properly denied access in accordance with KRS 197.025(2), incorporated into the Open Records Act by operation of KRS 61.878(1)(l); governing precedents validate this position.
More specifically, Mr. Squires requested the following documents and information:
(1) contract with Aramark for Canteen Service;
(2) the invitation to bid for canteen services;
(3) the bids of all who bid;
(4) the criteria upon which those bids were assessed;
(5) how each of the criter[ion] were weighted;
(6) the policy which states that canteen pricing shall be "on par" with convenience store pricing;
(7) the resources used to find the prices are "on par" with convenience stores;
(8) the policy reflecting that a "commission" be paid to the inmate fund and the amount of that commission
(9) documents reflecting that Aramark is paying a higher commission than the previous canteen operator; and
(10) Aramark contract to provide food services.
In a timely written response, Hilarye Dailey, Administrative Branch Manager, Department of Corrections, advised Mr. Squires that his request was denied on the basis of KRS 197.025(2) "as these records do not include a specific reference to you." By letter dated August 9, 2007, Mr. Squires initiated this appeal from the denial of his request; attached to his appeal is a copy of the aforementioned request dated July 27, 2007, a copy of Ms. Dailey's response dated August 1, 2007, and a copy of his request dated August 2, 2007, for a copy of the contract which BCC "or the inmate canteen fund (?) has to provide Westlaw in the Law Library, " in response to which BCC Records Custodian Suzie Oliver advised him "[t]here is no contract on this issue."
Upon receiving notification of Mr. Squires' appeal from this office, Emily Dennis, Staff Attorney, responded on behalf of BCC. As correctly observed by Ms. Dennis, "KRS 197.025(2) applies to Mr. Squires' request as an enactment of the General Assembly (See KRS 61.878(1)(l)). Since the contracts Mr. Squires requests do not contain a specific reference to him, the record[s are] exempt from disclosure to him under KRS 61.878(1)(l) and KRS 197.025(2)." In addition, Ms. Dennis notes that Ms. Oliver "also correctly informed Mr. Squires that there is no contract with BCC or the inmate canteen fund to provide Westlaw in the Law Library. " Rather, the Westlaw contract with DOC "for all DOC institutions, which Mr. Squires did not specifically request, is maintained by the DOC Fiscal Management Branch." Like the Aramark contracts, "the DOC Westlaw contract is exempt from disclosure to Mr. Squires pursuant to KRS 197.025(2)," as correctly argued by Ms. Dennis. Based upon the foregoing, BCC asserts that its denial of Mr. Squires' request should be affirmed.
In our view, 04-ORD-276 and 04-ORD-205 are controlling on the facts presented; a copy of each decision is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. As consistently recognized by the Attorney General, KRS 197.025(2) expressly authorizes correctional facilities like BCC to deny a request by an inmate unless the record(s) contains a specific reference to that inmate. Because the records at issue do not contain a specific reference to Mr. Squires, as required by the language of KRS 197.025(2), he is not entitled to inspect or to receive copies of those records, notwithstanding his underlying concerns. Regardless of the hardship Mr. Squires may believe that application of KRS 197.025(2) imposes, he is expressly precluded from gaining access to records which do not contain a specific reference to him by the mandatory language of this provision; accordingly, BCC properly relied upon KRS 197.025(2), incorporated into the Open Records Act by operation of KRS 61.878(1)(l), in denying both of his requests. 99-ORD-161, p. 2.
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.
Michael Squires, # 210106
Hilarye DaileyAdministrative Branch ManagerDepartment of CorrectionsBlackburn Correctional Complex3111 Spurr RoadLexington, KY 40511
Emily DennisStaff AttorneyOffice of Legal ServicesJustice & Public Safety Cabinet125 Holmes Street, 2nd FloorFrankfort, KY 40601