Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Records Act topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Open Records Act: written requests, 'prompt' response standard, and cost rules explained
Summary
City Attorney David Morrison told committee members that records requests must be in writing and request existing documents, that 'prompt' response is fact-dependent though a 10-business-day attorney-general timeline is commonly used, and that governments may bill only actual costs above $40.
David Morrison led the Open Records Act segment and delivered practical rules for handling public-records requests.
He said requests must be in writing and must seek documents that already exist; the city is not obligated to create new documents in response. Morrison noted a common misconception: there is no statutory 10-day 'prompt' deadline in general for every request, though courts and attorney-general processes commonly reference a 10-day window for seeking an attorney-general opinion about withholding.
Morrison explained cost and timing practices: if the cost exceeds $40 the city should notify the requester of the estimate and may charge only for actual supplies and labor; digitization is a best practice to reduce cost. He advised that governments may ask requesters to narrow or clarify overly broad requests and that responses should be explanatory rather than combative.
"The city is not required to do research," Morrison said. "If you come up to the city secretary and you start telling her orally all these things you want, you haven't made a request."
