23-ORD-334
December 14, 2023
In re: Mike Doyle/Louisville Metro Government
Summary: Louisville Metro Government (“Metro”) subverted the
intent of the Open Records Act (“the Act”), within the meaning of
KRS 61.880(4), by delaying its final response beyond the five-day period
under KRS 61.880(1) without invoking KRS 61.872(5), explaining the
cause for delay, or giving the earliest date when records would be
available.
Open Records Decision
On November 1, 2023, Mike Doyle (“Appellant”) submitted a request to Metro
for copies of five categories of records related to Metro Parks, Jefferson Memorial
Forest, and Wilderness Foundation (collectively, “the entities”). Specifically, he
requested “all regulations and statu[t]es regulating” the entities, “all regulations in
regard to real estate acquisitions or sales for” the entities, “5 previous Annual budgets
for” the entities, “annual budgets for 5 previous years for real estate acquisitions for”
the entities, and “any acquisitions by [the entities] with addresses and purchase
prices within the past 5 years.” Five business days later, on November 8, 2023, Metro
responded to the request and provided hyperlinks to websites containing “regulations
relating to all properties when permits are needed,” which the Appellant had not
requested; city budgets for 2022 and 2024; Metro ordinances for parks; and Metro’s
collected ordinances. Metro further informed the Appellant his request was “still
being processe[d]” and “additional records will be provided when they are made
available.” This appeal followed.
Under KRS 61.880(1), a public agency must decide within five business days
whether to grant a request or deny it. This time may be extended under
KRS 61.872(5) when records are “in active use, in storage or not otherwise available,”
if the agency gives “a detailed explanation of the cause . . . for further delay and theplace, time, and earliest date on which the public record will be available for
inspection.” An agency may not impose a lengthy delay under KRS 61.872(5) without
explaining why the delay is necessary. See, e.g., 21-ORD-045. Here, however, Metro
did not invoke KRS 61.872(5) at all, nor did it explain the cause for further delay or
give the earliest date when the “additional records” would be available.
On November 28, 2023, approximately two weeks after the Appellant initiated
this appeal, Metro issued its final response to the request. It characterized the
requests for regulations and statutes as “a request for information, rather than a
request for identifiable records” maintained by Metro, but provided a copy of “a policy,
rather than a regulation, regarding property it owns.” With regard to the requests for
annual budgets, Metro provided “5 years of full Parks budget documents,” including
budget items for Jefferson Memorial Forest and property acquisitions.1 Metro also
noted “the Wilderness Foundation is [a] private non-profit corporation,” not
controlled by Metro, which raises its own funds.
Under KRS 61.880(4), a person who “feels the intent of [the Act] is being
subverted by an agency short of denial of inspection, including but not limited to . . .
delay past the five (5) day period described in” KRS 61.880(1), may appeal to this
Office as if the request had been denied. Here, Metro issued its final response eleven
business days after the statutory deadline and only after receiving notice of this
appeal. Furthermore, Metro has not attempted to explain why it took an additional
two weeks to provide one policy and five budget documents and deny the remainder
of the request. Accordingly, Metro subverted the intent of the Act by delay within the
meaning of KRS 61.880(4).
A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating an action in the
appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882 within 30 days
from the date of this decision. Pursuant to KRS 61.880(3), the Attorney General shall
be notified of any action in circuit court, but shall not be named as a party in that
action or in any subsequent proceedings. The Attorney General will accept notice of
the complaint emailed to OAGAppeals@ky.gov.
Daniel Cameron
Attorney General
s/ James M. Herrick
James M. Herrick
Assistant Attorney General
1
Regarding the Appellant’s final request for property acquisitions, Metro provided a response, but
that response is not fully reproduced in the record on appeal.#519
Distributed to:
Mr. Mike Doyle
Alice Lyon, Esq.
Natalie Johnson, Esq.
Annale R. Taylor, Esq.
Nicole Pang, Esq.