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 disputed factual record precludes conclusive resolution of the procedural issue presented. That issue is whether Northpoint Training Center violated KRS 197.025(7) 1 by failing to respond in a timely fashion to Uriah Pasha's May 10, 2013, request for the audio recording of his April 5, 2012, adjustment hearing. Mr. Pasha asserts that NTC ignored his request but presents no evidence to support his claim. Compare 01-ORD-37 (inmate offers as proof of delivery of open records request a receipt showing the transfer of funds to the facility for copying and postage costs of records identified in that request). NTC asserts that its open records request log confirms that Mr. Pasha's request did not reach Offender Information Services. If Mr. Pasha properly transmitted his request, and the request was misdirected within the agency, the fault lies with NTC. If, on the other hand, Mr. Pasha's request did not reach NTC, the facility cannot be faulted for its failure to respond. The Attorney General is not equipped to resolve this factual dispute.
After receiving notification of Mr. Pasha's open records appeal, 2 NTC immediately responded to his request by agreeing to provide him with a copy of the tape upon receipt of copying and postage charges in the amount of $ 2.92. The facility's actions, in this regard, were entirely consistent with KRS 61.872(3)(b) and KRS 61.874(1). Those statutes authorize public agencies to "mail copies upon receipt of all fees and the cost of mailing" and to require "advance payment of the prescribed [copying] fee, including postage where appropriate." NTC fully discharged its statutory duties in agreeing to mail Mr. Pasha a copy of the tape upon prepayment of copying and postage charges. 3 Accord, 10-ORD-038. We therefore find no violation of the substantive provisions of 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.
Distributed to:
Uriah Pasha, # 092028Kelly TyreeAmy V. Barker
Footnotes
Footnotes