25-ORD-416 – Ricky Ladd/Graves County School District

Opinion Content:

December 18, 2025

In re: Ricky Ladd/Graves County School District

Summary: The Graves County School District (“the District”) did not
violate the Open Records Act (“the Act”) when it withheld records that
were “preliminary drafts” or “notes” under KRS 61.878(1)(i).

Open Records Decision

Ricky Ladd (“the Appellant”) submitted a request to the District for a copy of
“a document that briefly disclosed parts of the contents of the [superintendent’s] new
contract,” from which the Appellant alleged “the Board Chair read” at the May 2025
school board meeting before the board approved the contract. In a timely response,
the District denied the request on the grounds that the records requested were
“preliminary drafts and notes pursuant to KRS 61.878(i)” [sic]. This appeal followed.

KRS 61.878(1)(i) exempts from disclosure “[p]reliminary drafts, notes, [and]
correspondence with private individuals, other than correspondence which is
intended to give notice of final action of a public agency.” A preliminary draft is “a
tentative version, sketch, or outline” of a final document. 05-ORD-179. Preliminary
drafts “by their very nature are rejected when a final [version] is approved.” 24-ORD-
193. Thus, a preliminary draft does not lose its preliminary status when the agency
takes final action. See, e.g., 21-ORD-089. Notes are records “created as an aid to
memory or as a basis for a fuller statement.” 05-ORD-179. As such, like preliminary
drafts, notes retain their preliminary status after final agency action. See, e.g., 21-
ORD-168.

Here, the Appellant argues that “the document ceased being a preliminary
draft the moment it was used as the official public statement during an open meeting
and as part of the agency’s final action.” The District, however, asserts “the board
chair did have various handwritten notations setting forth thoughts for consideration
regarding various meeting topics, including the superintendent’s contract” and
referred to those notes “at times during the meeting, but the notations were not read
as a whole into the record, verbatim.” In general, a document does not “forfeit its

preliminary status” under KRS 61.878(1)(i) merely by virtue of having been used in
some manner at a public meeting. 15-ORD-087. Furthermore, the District points out
that the final agency action in this case was the approved contract, which has been
provided to the Appellant.

“Notes used to give a speech remain exempt under KRS 61.878(1)(i) after the
speech is given.” 25-ORD-134 n.3; see also 24-ORD-193; 21-ORD-168. Likewise, “[a]n
outline or draft, which is not strictly followed in delivering a speech, is not the final
version of a speech, and therefore remains exempt after the speech is delivered, just
as notes do.” 25-ORD-134. Accordingly, the District did not violate the Act when it
withheld the board chair’s notations as “preliminary drafts” or “notes” under
KRS 61.878(1)(i).

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 [email protected].

Russell Coleman
Attorney General

/s/ James M. Herrick
James M. Herrick
Assistant Attorney General

Mr. Ricky Ladd
Jesse E. Wright, Esq.
Ms. Tiffany Williams