Can a North Dakota school district charge in advance for future records requests after a costly search?

Plain-English summary

North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley concluded that the Mandan Public School District (MPS) did not violate the state's open records law on either of two issues a citizen raised. First, MPS provided two emails that fell slightly outside the exact date range the requester, Karen Jordan, had specified, but MPS also told her plainly that no other emails existed, so the AG treated the response as compliant rather than as a failure to answer the actual request. Second, after spending more than two hours searching roughly 5,000 email accounts to find the responsive messages, MPS told Ms. Jordan it would charge her $25 in advance for any future requests about board member emails. The AG found nothing unlawful about that warning: North Dakota's open records law expressly allows a public entity to charge up to $25 per hour, excluding the first hour, when a search takes more than an hour, and telling a requester about that in advance is not a threat.

MPS ultimately provided the records for free despite the time it took, and the AG found no further corrective steps were needed.

What this means for you

School districts and other public entities that field time-consuming records requests

The opinion holds that providing records beyond the requester's specified time period does not violate the open records law when the entity also clearly communicates that no other responsive records exist. The opinion also holds that informing a requester of the statutory $25-per-hour search fee (after the first hour) in advance of future requests is lawful and is not a "threat" against the requester.

People submitting open records requests to North Dakota public entities

The opinion confirms that a public entity can charge up to $25 per hour for search time beyond the first hour, and that multiple requests within seven days from the same requester can be treated as one request for fee-calculation purposes. Expect a fee notice if your request requires substantial search time, especially for follow-up requests on the same subject.

Government attorneys advising on records-fee policies

The opinion treats "informing a requester that any future requests will be subject to the legally allowable charges" as a routine, lawful practice, not coercive conduct, so long as the fee actually charged tracks what the statute permits.

Common questions

Q: Can a North Dakota public entity charge for searching for records?
A: Yes. The opinion confirms an entity may charge up to $25 per hour, not counting the first hour, when locating records (including electronic records) takes more than an hour.

Q: Is it retaliation for an agency to warn a requester about future fees?
A: No, according to this opinion. Telling a requester in advance that future requests will be subject to the legally allowable search fee is not a threat; it is simply informing them of the statutory charge.

Q: What if the records provided don't exactly match the time period I asked for?
A: Based on this opinion, that alone is not a violation if the entity also confirms that no other responsive records exist for the period you actually requested.

Q: Can multiple requests from the same person be combined for fee purposes?
A: Yes. The opinion notes that if a public entity receives five or more requests from the same requester within seven days, it may treat them as one request when calculating the time spent locating records.

Background and statutory framework

North Dakota's open records law requires a public entity to furnish requested public records upon request, but does not require it to create or compile a record that does not exist, and when issuing an opinion on an alleged violation, the Attorney General bases the opinion on the facts the public entity provides. The law separately allows an entity to charge a search fee of up to $25 per hour (excluding the first hour) when locating records takes more than an hour, and permits withholding records pending payment of any outstanding balance from prior requests.

Citations and references

Statutes:
- N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18, general open records access requirement
- N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18(1), records open and accessible except as otherwise provided by law
- N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18(2), duty to furnish a copy of requested public records
- N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18(4), no obligation to create or compile a record that does not exist
- N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1(1), AG opinions based on facts provided by the public entity
- N.D.C.C. §§ 15.1-07-01, 15.1-09-33, 44-04-17.1(13)(b), school districts as public entities subject to the open records law

Source

• Landing page: https://attorneygeneral.nd.gov/the-north-dakota-attorney-general-issued-an-opinion-to-the-mandan-public-school-district/
• Original PDF: https://attorneygeneral.nd.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/2026-O-14.pdf

Original opinion text

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL
www.attorneygeneral.nd.gov
(701) 328-2210

Drew H. Wrigley
ATTORNEY GENERAL

OPEN RECORDS AND MEETINGS OPINION
2026-O-14

DATE ISSUED:

June 29, 2026

ISSUED TO:

Mandan Public School District
CITIZEN'S REQUEST FOR OPINION

Karen Jordan requested an opinion from this office under N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1 asking whether
the Mandan Public School District violated N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18 by providing records not
responsive to her request, and by requiring an unlawful fee be paid before future requests are
made.
FACTS PRESENTED
Rick Horn is the owner of HJL Management Company, which has a contract with the Morton
County Housing Authority to provide management services. He is also a member of the Mandan
Public School Board. On June 20, 2023, Ms. Jordan emailed Rick Horn for "the last email [he]
received that can be released that shows all the email addresses of all members of the [Mandan
Public School District] Board." Less than ten hours later, Mr. Horn replied, "[o]ur practice is for
all email requests to go through the Mandan School District office. Please contact Dr. Bitz at the
Mandan District Office with your request." Ms. Jordan responded to Mr. Horn, arguing that he
had an obligation to personally go through his records to find the record that she requested.
Ms. Jordan then followed up and told Mr. Horn, "[w]hat I'm asking for now is a copy of an email
sent to [Mr. Horn's HJL Management Company's email address] this year by anyone connected
to the Mandan Public School District." Mr. Horn contacted Dr. Mike Bitz, Superintendent of
Mandan Public School District (MPS) to respond on behalf of MPS. Between staff and students,
MPS has "over 5,000 accounts." Dr. Bitz contacted the technology department to conduct a
search of the account resulting in two responsive emails.
Through further email correspondence to Dr. Bitz, Ms. Jordan asked "for the last email that [he]
sent to Mr. Horn." Dr. Bitz provided the responsive document to Ms. Jordan on June 30,
2023. Dr. Bitz also stated "[s]ince we have spent over 2 hours in trying to answer your open
records requests, we will need to charge you $25 in advance for any future requests concerning
board members [sic] emails."
Ms. Jordan timely filed a request with this Office for an opinion about her records requests. The
request for an opinion was explicitly made "against Superintendent Mike Bitz." Therefore, this
office will not address Mr. Horn's initial response to her. Ms. Jordan has also requested an
opinion from this office regarding the response to her records request from the Morton County
Housing Authority, which is being addressed in a separate opinion.
ISSUE
1. Whether MPS violated N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18 by providing records not responsive to Ms.
Jordan's request for emails sent from district affiliated accounts to a specific email
address.
2. Whether MPS violated N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18(2) by informing Ms. Jordan that MPS would
charge her $25 in advance of any future records requests relating to board member
emails.
ANALYSIS
Issue One
MPS is a public entity subject to the open records law. N.D.C.C. §§ 15.1-07-01, 15.1-09-33, 44-04-17.1(13)(b).
"Except as otherwise specifically
provided by law, all records of a public entity are public records, open and accessible for
inspection during reasonable office hours." N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18(1). "Upon request for a copy of specific public records
[a public entity] shall furnish the requester one copy of the public records requested." N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18(2). An entity
is not required to "create or compile a record that does not exist." N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18(4). When issuing opinions on
potential open record violations, "the attorney general shall base the opinion on the facts given
by the public entity." N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1(1).
Dr. Bitz provided Ms. Jordan two emails that were sent from any MPS address to Mr. Horn's
company email. MPS was not required to provide these records as they fell outside the time
range that Ms. Jordan requested. However, the email from Dr. Bitz is clear that no other emails
existed which were sent to Mr. Horn's email account. It is my opinion that MPS complied with
N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18 by providing records sent to Mr. Horn's email account and by informing
Ms. Jordan that no other emails were sent to that address.
Issue Two
"An entity may impose a fee not exceeding twenty-five dollars per hour per request, excluding
the initial hour, for locating records, including electronic records, if locating the records requires
more than one hour." N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18(2). "If a public entity receives five or more requests from the same requester
within seven days, the public entity may treat the requests as one request in computing the time it
takes to locate and excise the records." Id. "The public entity may withhold records pursuant to the
request until such time as a requester provides payment for any outstanding balance for prior
requests." Id.
MPS provided the requested emails to Ms. Jordan at no charge even though it took more than
two hours of work to find the responsive records. After telling Ms. Jordan his understanding of
the allowable charges by law, Dr. Bitz told Ms. Jordan that any future requests that she would
make regarding school board member emails would be subject to a $25.00 fee in advance. The
open records law allows public entities to charge up to $25 per hour after the first initial hour for
searching for records. It is my opinion that MPS did not violate the open records law when it
informed Ms. Jordan that it would charge the legally permissible amount for future requests.
CONCLUSIONS
1. MPS did not violate N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18 by providing records beyond the time period
requested when it also communicated that no other records were responsive to Ms.
Jordan's request.
2. MPS did not violate N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18(2) by informing Ms. Jordan that it would
charge her $25 in advance of any future records requests. It is not a threat to inform a
requester that any future requests will be subject to the legally allowable charges found in
N.D.C.C. § 44-04-18(2).
STEPS NEEDED TO REMEDY VIOLATION
Mandan Public School District has already provided the requested records at no cost to Ms.
Jordan, so no further steps are required to remedy the violation.

Drew H. Wrigley
Attorney General
wdw
cc:

Karen Jordan