Opinion
Opinion By: Andy Beshear,Attorney General;James M. Herrick,Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Decision
The question presented in this appeal is whether the Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex ("EKCC") violated the Kentucky Open Records Act in its disposition of the request of inmate Matthew Iseral to inspect contract between the Department of Corrections and three private vendors. We conclude that the actions of EKCC were in accordance with the Act.
Mr. Iseral made a written request dated September 1, 2016, for "a copy of Aramarks contract with DOC and Keefe's contract with DOC and JPAYS contract with DOC." Open Records Coordinator Sonya Wright denied the request on September 2, 2016, based on KRS 197.025(2) as incorporated into the Open Records Act by KRS 61.878(1)(l), since the records did not contain a "specific reference" to Mr. Iseral. This appeal was initiated on September 6, 2016, and a response was provided on September 13, 2016, by Justice and Public Safety Cabinet Staff Attorney Angela E. Cordery.
KRS 197.025(2) provides as follows:
KRS 61.870 to 61.884 to the contrary notwithstanding, the department shall not be required to comply with a request for any record from any inmate confined in a jail or any facility or any individual on active supervision under the jurisdiction of the department, unless the request is for a record which contains a specific reference to that individual.
The Attorney General has long interpreted this provision as meaning that only documents mentioning the inmate by name need be provided. See, e.g. , 99-ORD-157. Furthermore, we held specifically in 07-ORD-193 that an inmate's inspection of a correctional facility's contract with Aramark Correctional Services, Inc., was properly denied because the contract did not contain a specific reference to him. Since the contracts with the other two named entities also presumably do not and would not mention Mr. Iseral by name, KRS 197.025(2) is dispositive of this appeal and EKCC properly denied inspection of the records.
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 must be notified of any action in circuit court, but should not be named as a party in that action or in any subsequent proceedings.