How long can a North Dakota township take to respond to an open records request before the delay becomes a violation?

Plain-English summary

Ron Loctao asked Harrison Township for meeting minutes by email in November 2022. The township did not respond. He emailed again in December. Still no response. After he asked the AG's office to step in, the township finally produced the records on January 6, 2023, more than six weeks after the original request.

The township explained that the treasurer responsible for its email account had unexpectedly resigned. AG Drew Wrigley said a public entity is responsible for reviewing incoming correspondence and checking for records requests. He identified other arrangements for managing the email account or an automated reply with another way to submit requests as possible responses to the resignation. The township offered no additional justification for the delay.

Six weeks for the first request, and over a month for the second, was unreasonable under N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18. Reasonable response time is "usually measured in a few hours or days rather than weeks." The township violated open records law.

The opinion notes the township already fixed the underlying problem by assigning more than one person to oversee the email account, so no further corrective action was needed. The records were ultimately provided.

What this means for you

North Dakota townships and other small public entities

The opinion holds that "a public entity is responsible for timely reviewing its incoming correspondence and checking for records requests." The treasurer's unexpected resignation did not justify this delay. The AG suggested other arrangements for managing the account or an automated reply that offered another way to submit requests. The Township later assigned more than one position to oversee the account.

Citizens requesting records from a small public entity

The opinion confirms that "the requester is not required to contact the entity again to find out when the records will be provided or made available." The duty to respond within a reasonable time stays with the public entity even after a single follow-up has gone unanswered.

Public entities measuring "reasonable" response time

The opinion describes the standard: "the delay permitted will usually be measured in a few hours or days rather than weeks." Reasonableness can stretch where volume of records, complex review, redactions, staff workload, or competing emergencies are at issue. The opinion treats a six-week first-response delay and a month-plus second-response delay, with no additional justification offered, as unreasonable.

Remedy already taken

The opinion notes the Township assigned more than one position to oversee the email account and produced all requested records, so no further corrective measures were ordered.

Common questions

Q: What is "reasonable" under N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18?
A: The opinion says the permitted delay "will usually be measured in a few hours or days rather than weeks." It lists record volume, review, redactions, staff availability and competing urgent duties as circumstances that can affect the answer. The Township offered no additional justification for its delay.

Q: Can a small township argue that staff turnover excuses delay?
A: The treasurer's unexpected resignation did not justify the delay in this case. The AG said the Township remained responsible for checking its correspondence and could have arranged other account management or an automated reply with an alternative submission method.

Q: Did the AG require the Township to take additional corrective steps?
A: No. By the time of the opinion, the Township had assigned more than one position to oversee its email account and Mr. Loctao had received all the requested records. The opinion said no further corrective measures were required.

Citations

• N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18, reasonable response time for records requests
• N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1, citizen's right to request AG opinion
• N.D.A.G. 2024-O-11, requester not required to follow up
• N.D.A.G. 2022-O-12, month-plus delay unreasonable
• N.D.A.G. 2008-O-12: month delay for township minutes unreasonable

Source

• Landing page: https://attorneygeneral.nd.gov/harrison-township-failed-to-respond-to-a-records-request-within-a-reasonable-time/
• Original PDF: https://attorneygeneral.nd.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/2025-O-04.pdf

Original opinion text

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL
Drew H. Wrigley, ATTORNEY GENERAL

OPEN RECORDS AND MEETINGS OPINION 2025-O-04
DATE ISSUED: March 6, 2025
ISSUED TO: Harrison Township

CITIZEN'S REQUEST FOR OPINION

Ron Loctao requested an opinion from this office under N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1 asking whether the Harrison Township violated N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18 by failing to properly respond to a request for records within a reasonable time.

FACTS PRESENTED

Ron Loctao sent an email to Harrison Township (Township) on November 23, 2022, requesting a copy of the Township's meeting minutes from January 2022 to August 2022.[1] After receiving no response to his initial request, Mr. Loctao sent a second email to the Township on December 4, 2022, requesting meeting minutes from January 2022 to December 2022.[2] Again after receiving no response from the Township, Mr. Loctao contacted this office for an opinion.[3]

On December 23, 2022, this office reached out to the Township regarding Mr. Loctao's records request.[4] The Township informed this office that the Township's official mailing address is the email address where Mr. Loctao sent his records request.[5] The Township explained the delay in responding to Mr. Loctao was caused by the unexpected resignation of the Township's treasurer who was responsible for overseeing the email account.[6] The Township provided the minutes electronically to Mr. Loctao on January 6, 2023.[7]

ISSUE

Whether the Harrison Township violated N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18 by failing to respond to a records request within a reasonable time.

ANALYSIS

A township is a political subdivision and is therefore a "public entity" subject to the open records and meetings law.[8] A public entity must respond to an open records request within a reasonable time by either providing the requested records or by explaining the legal authority for not granting the request.[9] The law does not usually require an immediate response, however, the delay permitted will usually be measured in a few hours or days rather than weeks.[10] Depending on the circumstances, a delay may be reasonable for a variety of reasons, including "the number of records requested, reviewing large volumes of documents to respond to a request, excising closed or confidential information, availability and workload of staff who can respond to the request, or balancing other responsibilities of the public entity that demand immediate attention."[11] However once a request for records is made, "it is the responsibility of the public entity to respond to the request within a reasonable time and the requester is not required to contact the entity again to find out when the records will be provided or made available."[12]

On November 23, 2022, Mr. Loctao sent an email to the Township requesting meeting minutes from January through August.[13] When the Township did not respond, Mr. Loctao sent a follow up email on December 4, 2022, requesting meeting minutes from January through December.[14] The Township did not provide the requested records until January 6, 2023.[15] The Township explains that the delay was caused by "the unexpected resignation of the [Township's] [t]reasurer, who was responsible for overseeing the email [account]."[16] However, a public entity is responsible for timely reviewing its incoming correspondence and checking for records requests.[17] For example, the Township could have made other arrangements for managing its email account or set up an automated reply message with an alternative method for submitting requests to the Township after the treasurer's resignation. It is not the requestor's obligation to again contact the entity to find out when the records will be provided or made available.[18] The Township has provided no additional justification for the delay. Under these circumstances, a six-week delay before responding to Mr. Loctao's first request and over a month delay for the second request is unreasonable.[19]

Accordingly, it is my opinion the Township violated the open records law by failing to respond to an appropriate records request within a reasonable time.

CONCLUSION

The Harrison Township violated N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18 by failing to respond to a records request within a reasonable time.

STEPS NEEDED TO REMEDY VIOLATIONS

The Township has already taken steps to rectify its mistake by assigning more than one position to oversee the Township's email account. Mr. Loctao has received all the requested records, therefore no further corrective measures required.

Drew H. Wrigley
Attorney General

AMR/AML/mjh
cc: Ron Loctao

[1] Email from Ron Loctao to Harrison Twp. (Nov. 23, 2022, 4:34 PM).

[2] Email from Ron Loctao to Harrison Twp. (Dec. 4, 2022, 10:05 PM).

[3] Email from Ron Loctao to Annique M. Lockard, Assistant Att'y Gen., Off. of Att'y Gen. (Dec. 21, 2022, 9:24 AM); Email from Ron Loctao to Annique M. Lockard, Assistant Att'y Gen., Off. of Att'y Gen. (Dec. 21, 2022, 9:27 AM).

[4] Email from Annique M. Lockard, Assistant Att'y Gen., Off. of Att'y Gen., to Jon Lochtowe, Chairman, Harrison Twp. (Dec. 23, 2022, 1:29 PM).

[5] Letter from Cindy Whitesell, Clerk, Harrison Twp., to Annique M. Lockard, Assistant Att'y Gen., Off. of Att'y Gen. (Jan. 6, 2023).

[6] Id.

[7] Id.

[8] N.D.C.C. § 44-04-17.1(11), (13)(b).

[9] N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18.

[10] N.D.A.G. 2011-O-07, citing N.D.A.G. 2009-O-07; N.D.A.G. 2008-O-08; N.D.A.G. 2004-O-07; N.D.A.G. 2002-O-06; see also N.D.A.G. 2007-O-10.

[11] N.D.A.G. 2021-O-09, citing N.D.A.G. 2014-O-06; N.D.A.G. 2013-O-15; N.D.A.G. 2012-O-07; N.D.A.G. 2010-O-04.

[12] N.D.A.G. 2024-O-11 (quoting N.D.A.G. 2016-O-08).

[13] Email from Ron Loctao to Harrison Twp. (Nov. 23, 2022, 4:34 PM).

[14] Email from Ron Loctao to Harrison Twp. (Dec. 4, 2022, 10:05 PM).

[15] Letter from Cindy Whitesell, Harrison Twp. Clerk, to Annique M. Lockard, Assistant Att'y Gen., Off. of Att'y Gen. (Jan. 6, 2023).

[16] Id.

[17] N.D.A.G. 2016-O-08.

[18] N.D.A.G. 2024-O-11.

[19] N.D.A.G. 2022-O-12 (waiting over a month to provide minutes was an unreasonable delay); N.D.A.G. 2008-O-12 (finding a delay of more than a month in providing Township minutes was unreasonable); N.D.A.G. 2007-O-10 (finding a delay of four weeks to provide meeting minutes was unreasonable). N.D.A.G. 2002-O-06 (concluding that nearly a month and a half delay in providing minutes was unreasonable); N.D.A.G. 98-O-19 (failing to provide copies of minutes within a month was an unreasonable delay).