Does a North Dakota public entity violate open records law by failing to answer a request it never received?

Plain-English summary

Holli Jo Kronberg said she sent one records request by mail and two by email to the Dickey County Senior Citizens Center. The Center said it received none of them. The Attorney General had to base the opinion on the Center's account and found no open records violation: a public entity cannot respond to a request it never received.

The conclusion is specific to those three requests. A separate, hand-delivered request was received earlier, and the Center answered that it had no responsive records.

What this means for you

People requesting public records

The opinion turns on whether the Center received the requests, not merely on whether the requester says she sent them. For the three requests at issue, the Attorney General used the Center's stated facts and found no obligation to respond.

Public entities

The Center is covered by the open records law because it receives some mill levy support, as the opinion's footnote explains. Its status as a public entity did not change the outcome for requests the Attorney General found it never received.

Common questions

Q: Must a North Dakota public entity answer a records request it never received? A: No. On the Center's account, it received neither the mailed letter nor the two emails, so the Attorney General found no duty to answer those requests.

Q: Does saying I sent an email establish that an agency received my records request? A: This opinion did not resolve that factual disagreement in the requester's favor. It says the Attorney General had to rely on the Center's supplied facts and found that the requests were not received.

Q: Is a senior citizens center covered by North Dakota's open records law? A: This Center is. The opinion says its partial support from mill levy funds makes it a public entity for open records purposes.

Background and statutory framework

Kronberg sought an opinion under N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1 about three unanswered requests dated October 22 and November 3 and 18, 2025. The Center said it checked its records and found no sign that it received them. The Attorney General was required to use the Center's facts in this opinion. A footnote cites an earlier Attorney General opinion for the proposition that an unreceived request creates no duty to respond.

Citations and references

• N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1

Source

• Landing page: https://attorneygeneral.nd.gov/the-north-dakota-attorney-general-issued-a-summary-opinion-to-dickey-county-senior-citizens-center/
• Original PDF: https://attorneygeneral.nd.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/2026-SO-23.pdf

Original opinion text

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL
www.attorneyg en era I. nd. gov
(701) 328-2210

Drew H. Wrigley
ATTORNEY GENERAL

OPEN RECORDS AND MEETINGS SUMMARY OPINION
2026-SO-23

DATE ISSUED:

September 25, 2026

ISSUED TO:

Dickey County Senior Citizens Center
SUMMARY OPINION 1

Holli Jo Kronberg requested an opinion from this office under N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1 asking whether the Dickey County Senior Citizens Center2 (Center) violated N .D.C.C. § 44-04-18 by not responding to three open records requests. Ms. Kronberg alleges that she made a records request on October 22, 2025, which was sent through the United States Postal Service. She further alleges that she sent additional requests on November 3, 2025, and November 18, 2025, by email. 3 The Center states that it has reviewed its records and did not receive either the letter or the two emails from Ms. Kronberg. This office must base this opinion on the facts provided by the Center. 4 Because the Center never received the requests, it had no obligation to respond and therefore did not violate the open records law. 5

DrewH. Wn ey
Attorney General
srh
cc:
1

Holli Jo Kronberg

This Summary Opinion is issued pursuant to the authority granted to this office in N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1 (I). 2 The Dickey County Senior Citizens Center is supported in part by mill levy funds and is therefore a public entity for purposes of the open records law. See N.D.A.G. 2003-0-02. 3 Prior to the three requests subject to this opinion, Ms. Kronberg also made a records request which was hand delivered on October 15, 2025. The Center responded that it did not have any records responsive to that request on October 31, 2025. 4 See N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1(1). 5 N.D.A.G. 2026-0-07 ("An unreceived open records request creates no more of an obligation to respond than does a request that is never sent or communicated.").