The Government Records Office continued a public-records appeal by Parker Christiansen seeking construction-related documents for a 2022 Mount Pleasant City well and waterline project and directed the city to reprocess the request.

Christiansen said his original GRAMA request sought original contract and bid documents, payment records and invoices, change orders, correspondence between the city and contractor HMH Excavation, public notices and statements, project specifications and timelines, documentation of work completed and outstanding, and nonprivileged documents relevant to the city’s dispute with HMH Excavation.

City counsel argued the city had properly denied broad categories of records in part because litigation involving the project is pending and because many responsive documents are maintained by JUB Engineers, the city’s agent. The city’s counsel relied primarily on Utah Code provisions protecting attorney work product and records concerning pending litigation and said the city does not possess many requested files in its own databases. The city did indicate it possessed the original contract and some change orders but asserted litigation protections for other items.

Christiansen countered that most requested materials are routine business records created in the ordinary course of project administration (contracts, change orders, payment records, inspection reports) and were not created in anticipation of litigation; he argued that JUB’s work product, as the city’s agent, is retained by the city and subject to GRAMA.

After hearing argument, the director declined to enter a final ruling and ordered Mount Pleasant to reprocess the request, locate and provide records that are not legitimately privileged or work product, and provide an estimate of fees and time required to comply if the city believes processing will impose costs. The director observed that many items Christansen requested would not qualify as work product under GRAMA and encouraged the parties to narrow requests and resolve nonprivileged production without further hearing.

The matter was continued for a future hearing after the city completes reprocessing and, if appropriate, supplying a fee estimate.