Upham v. Hummel

ORS 192.329(2)(b) and (f) provide that a public body's response to a public record request is complete if it asserts that the requested records are exempt from disclosure with a statement that the requester may seek review of the exemption. ORS 192.324(4)(a) provides that if there is no exemption, a "public body may establish fees reasonably calculated to reimburse the public body for the public body's actual cost of making public records available." 

Upham appealed a judgment the denied his public records request because he failed to pay a processing fee. Upham argued that he had no obligation to pay the fee if the public body failed to request the fee. ORS 192.329(2)(b) and (f) provide that a public body's response to a public record request is complete if it asserts that the requested records are exempt from disclosure with a statement that the requester may seek review of the exemption. ORS 192.324(4)(a) provides that if there is no exemption, a "public body may establish fees reasonably calculated to reimburse the public body for the public body's actual cost of making public records available."  The Court of Appeals reasoned that if there was an exemption to the production of records, ORS 192.324(4)(a) was not applicable and the public body had no duty to submit a calculated fee request in order to comply with ORS 192.329.  The court held that ORS 192.329(3)(a) "does not require that all fee requests be asserted within the 15-day response period."  Affirmed.