Representatives Steve Riley (R-Glasgow), Kevin Jackson (R-Bowling Green), and Shawn McPherson, (R-Scottsville) filed House Bill 491, an ACT relating to state government on February 12.

https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/record/25rs/HB491.html

The multipart bill amends various existing statutes, including KRS 61.880 of the open records law, “to establish a 60-day timeframe to appeal an agency's denial of a request to inspect a public record."

A parallel provision has existed in the open meetings law -- at KRS 61.846(2) -- since 1992 and has had minimum adverse impact on an open meetings complainant's right of appeal to the Attorney General or the courts.

https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=23054

KRS 61.846(2) was added to the open meetings law -- which was undergoing substantial legislative review and revision in the period leading up to 1992. I remotely recall a discussion of the need for finality relative to action taken in public meetings — necessitating finality as to opprtunities to appeal -- a policy not supported by the proposed amendment to KRS 61.880(2) in the open records law.

https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=51394

The courts have contrasted the open meetings 60 day “statute of limitations” to the absence of an analogous “statute of limitations” in the open records law, rejecting public agency claims that an open records appeal can be time barred:

“We do not believe it was a legislative oversight in not providing a deadline for requesting review by the Attorney General or initially appealing to the circuit court. An open records request is a pro se request by ‘any person,’ [now, “any resident” of Kentucky] the basic policy of the Open Records Law being that ‘free and open examination of public records is in the public interest[.]’ We opine that the omission of a deadline for a ‘complaining’ party to forward the request and the denial to the Attorney General is intentional.”

https://casetext.com/case/department-of-revenue-v-wyrick

Critics of HB 491 point out a number of gaping holes in the proposed 60 day deadline for filing an open records appeal — many of which are mirrored in the longstanding 60 day deadline for open meetings appeals. We will leave it to lawmakers to identify those holes and to consider whether they actually need to be filled.

Our concerns focus on the potential that the broadly worded HB 491, “an ACT relating to state government," including an amendment to the open records law, and the likelihood it is a mule, or placeholder, bill to which much more threatening amendments to the open records law may be attached.

https://forwardky.com/general-assembly-overrun-with-mule-bills/

And make no mistake, those threats to open government have not subsided. They may, in fact, be even greater this year than last.