26-ORD-102 – Hassan Crawford/Campbell County Attorney’s Office

Opinion Content:

March 16, 2026

In re: Hassan Crawford/Campbell County Attorney’s Office

Summary: The Office cannot find that the Campbell County Attorney’s
Office (“the County Attorney”) violated the Open Records Act (“the Act”)
because the Office is unable resolve the factual dispute between the
parties.

Open Records Decision

Hassan Crawford (“Appellant”) claims that on December 5, 2025, he submitted
a request to the County Attorney for records related to a dispute involving two
vehicles. 1 On January 5, 2026, having received no response from the County
Attorney, the Appellant initiated this appeal.

Under KRS 61.880(1), upon receiving a request for records under the Act, a
public agency “shall determine within five (5) [business] days . . . after the receipt of
any such request whether to comply with the request and shall notify in writing the
person making the request, within the five (5) day period, of its decision.” Here, the
Appellant submitted a request to the County Attorney and, one month later, he had
yet to receive a response. On appeal, the County Attorney asserts it did not receive a
records request from the Appellant. 2

1 Specifically, the Appellant claims he requested records “relating to: authorization for the tow,
statutory or administrative authority relied upon, communications directing or approving the tow or
continued retention, notices issued, and any records identifying responsibility for the seizure and
custody of the vehicle.”
2 The County Attorney asserts that, on December 5, 2025, it received a facsimile and emails from
the Appellant containing a “Notice of Nonresponse,” documents related to prior records requests made
to other agencies, and requests for information. As proof, the County Attorney provided those
documents to the Office.

The Office has routinely found that it is unable to resolve factual disputes
between a requester and a public agency, such as whether an agency received a
request. See, e.g., 24-ORD-184 (factual dispute as to whether an agency received a
request). Thus, the Office cannot find the County Attorney violated the Act because
the Office cannot resolve the factual dispute between the parties as to whether the
County Attorney received the Appellant’s December 5, 2025, request.

A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating an action in the
appropriate circuit court under KRS 61.880(5) and KRS 61.882 within 30 days from
the date of this decision. Under 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 [email protected].

Russell Coleman
Attorney General

/s/ Matthew Ray
Matthew Ray
Assistant Attorney General

Hassan Crawford
Steve Franzen
Adam Hill