Opinion
Opinion By: Jack Conway, Attorney General; James M. Herrick, Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Decision
At issue in this appeal is whether the Little Sandy Correctional Complex ("LSCC") violated the Kentucky Open Records Act in denying inmate Michael Reynolds' July 8, 2015, request for copies of "all EOR reports as well as any other administrative/disciplinary reports filed between 6/27/2015-7/8/2015 concerning cell-extract incidents on me while in isolation -- SMU-0-01." Because the Open Records Act does not exempt indigent requesters from the requirement for payment of copying fees codified at KRS 61.874(1), this office affirms the disposition of Mr. Reynolds' request in accordance with governing authorities.
The records custodian's disposition of Mr. Reynolds' request, dated July 9, 2015, stated as follows:
Request denied per KRS 61.874 as a request may require payment of fees. At this time your balance is .01 cent. Please resubmit your request when your balance will cover the cost of the requested copies. Copies are .10 cents per page.
Mr. Reynolds' appeal to this office was received on July 22, 2015.
In LSCC's response to the appeal, Amy V. Barker, Assistant General Counsel, Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, reiterates that Mr. Reynolds' request was denied because he did not have sufficient funds in his inmate account to cover the copying fees. She argues that "[u]nder the Open Records Act an indigent inmate is not entitled to free copies."
In our view, the reasoning contained in 08-ORD-044, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference, is equally applicable on the facts presented. The courts and this office have recognized the propriety of a Department of Corrections policy requiring advance payment of copying fees. In
Friend v. Rees, Ky. App., 696 S.W.2d 325 (1985), the Kentucky Court of Appeals held that an inmate is entitled to receive a copy of a record only after "complying with the reasonable charge of reproduction. " Accordingly, the Attorney General subsequently determined that it is "entirely proper for [a correctional] facility to require prepayment, and to enforce its standard policy relative to assessment of charges to inmate accounts ...."95-ORD-105. While acknowledging that "this prepayment policy might work a hardship on inmates, " this office has nevertheless upheld the policy as "entirely consistent with the Open Records Act and the rule announced in Friend v. Rees ."97-ORD-131 (quoting 95-ORD-90). In accordance with these precedents, LSCC did not violate the Open Records Act by denying Mr. Reynolds' request despite his inability to pay for the requested copies.
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.
Jack Conway
Attorney General
James M. Herrick
Assistant Attorney General