Opinion
Opinion By: Jack Conway, Attorney General; Amye L. Bensenhaver, Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Decision
This matter having been presented to the Attorney General in an open records appeal, and the Attorney General being sufficiently advised, we find that the City of Cumberland violated the Open Records Act in failing to respond in writing, and within three business days, to Charles Raleigh's request for financial and operational records maintained by the City. KRS 61.880(1). It is the decision of this office that 09-ORD-018, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference, is dispositive of the issue on appeal. In particular, we refer the parties to the discussion at pages 2 and 3 of that decision. Although the City belatedly responded to Mr. Raleigh's request in writing, that response was prompted by the City's receipt of this office's notification of Mr. Raleigh's appeal. 40 KAR 1:030 Section 2. It was apparently the City's belief that Mr. Raleigh was obligated to "check back" to determine if his request would be honored. The Open Records Act imposes no such requirement on a requester.
We trust that all records identified in Mr. Raleigh's request, or records containing the information he requested, have now been compiled and are available for inspection during regular business hours at the Office of the Cumberland City Clerk. KRS 61.872(3). If any information appearing in those records, such as social security numbers, was redacted, we trust that the city has prepared a written explanation for those redactions containing statutory citations supporting partial nondisclosure. KRS 61.878(4). Finally, it is understood that Mr. Raleigh is entitled to obtain copies of the records identified in his request upon payment of a reasonable copying charge not to exceed ten cents per page. KRS 61.874(1);
Friend v. Rees, 696 S.W.2d 325 (Ky. App. 1985); 200 KAR 1:020 Section 3. We assume that both the City of Cumberland and Mr. Raleigh stand ready to fulfill their respective obligations.
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.
Distributed to:
Charles RaleighRobin SmithLoretta CornettSteven Parker Boggs