26-ORD-177 – Jennifer Ginter/Kentucky State Reformatory

Opinion Content:

April 22, 2026

In re: Jennifer Ginter/Kentucky State Reformatory

Summary: The Kentucky State Reformatory (“the Reformatory”) did
not violate the Open Records Act (“the Act”) when it responded to a
request for information that did not describe public records.

Open Records Decision

Jennifer Ginter (“the Appellant”) submitted a request to the Reformatory for
“[j]ail credits” for a named inmate. In response, the Reformatory noted that the
Appellant’s request “is not an open records request” but provided the requested
information regarding “the dates that [the inmate] is currently/previously being
credited.” This appeal followed.

The Act does not require public agencies to answer interrogatories or provide
information in whatever form a requester demands. Rather, residents of the
Commonwealth may only inspect identifiable “public records” after submitting a
request “describing the records to be inspected.” KRS 61.872(2)(a). Here, the
Appellant’s request for an inmate’s “jail credits” did not describe specific public
records to be produced; rather, it asked the Reformatory for information. Although
the Reformatory was not required under the Act to compile and provide that
information, it chose to do so. Accordingly, the Reformatory did not violate the Act in
its disposition of the Appellant’s request.

The Appellant makes two specific allegations on appeal. First, she complains
about the Reformatory’s responses to certain other requests made by the inmate
himself. However, those matters are not within the scope of this appeal. See
KRS 61.880(2)(a) (requiring the requester to “forward to the Attorney General a copy
of the written request and a copy of the written response” to initiate an appeal).
Second, the Appellant complains that the inmate’s jail credit has been calculated
incorrectly. That issue is also beyond the scope of this appeal. See, e.g., 23-ORD-218
(noting the Attorney General “cannot adjudicate questions unrelated to the Act in an

appeal brought under KRS 61.880(1)”). Therefore, the issues raised by the Appellant
cannot be addressed in this appeal.

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/ Zachary M. Zimmerer
Zachary M. Zimmerer
Assistant Attorney General

Ms. Jennifer Ginter
Charles B. Bates, Esq.
Nathan Goens, Esq.
Ms. Sara Talarigo
Ms. Ann Smith