Alaska

There is no legal requirement in Alaska that a notice of intent to quash be filed before filing a motion to quash, nor is there any practice of doing so, nor are there other procedural steps required or recommended prior to moving to quash.

Alaska law makes no distinction as to who may request public records.

Although audio and video recording and photographing of public meetings is customarily done, the state OMA does not address this issue. If this issue arises, the press should argue there is a legal right to photograph or record such meetings, either implicit in the OMA, or arising from the common law or constitution. Be aware, however, that in the context of access to judicial proceedings, the courts have held there is a right to attend and observe court proceedings, but no right to record. Recording in the courts is considered a privilege governed by court rules.

The regulations provide no fines or other penalties for denying or delaying access to public records. However, Alaska law allows recovery of costs and a portion of attorney fees incurred (generally 20-30%) in successful suits to obtain public records, but also exposes access litigants to the risk of paying the other side’s fees and costs if the suit seeking access to records is unsuccessful.  See § V.D.9 [Open Records].

While there is nothing in the Open Meetings Act that specifically protects the privacy of patients, as such, this is effectively the result of provisions exempting from the coverage of the act altogether meetings of a hospital medical staff, AS 44.62.310(d)(4), and meetings of the governmental body or any committee of a hospital when holding a meeting solely to act upon matters of professional qualifications, privileges or discipline. AS 44.62.310(d)(5).

Overview

Alaska

Police blotters, like other documents in the custody or control of law enforcement or other public officials, should be disclosable pursuant to the state Public Records Act, but as a practical matter will most likely be redacted, under one or more of the provisions of AS 40.25.120(a)(6), especially (a)(6)(C), that permits withholding when disclosure could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of the personal privacy of a suspect, defendant, victim, or witness, or perhaps (a)(6)(A), regarding withholding of records that could reasonably be expected to interfere with en

Alaska appellate courts have not had occasion to squarely address the existence or scope of a reporter's privilege. In those trial court proceedings where the qualified constitutional reporter's privilege has been asserted, it has been assumed that to overcome the privilege the subpoenaing party must make a showing that the information sought is crucial to, or goes to the heart of, its case.

The law provides access to all records that are developed or received by a public agency, or by a private contractor for a public agency, and that are preserved for their informational value or as evidence of the organization or operation of the public agency, but does not include proprietary software programs. AS 40.25.220(3).

It is only "meetings" of those governed by the OMA that are within the coverage of the OMA. Staff meetings or other gatherings of the employees of a public entity are exempt. AS 44.62.310(d)(6). Conduct of individuals, as such, whether it be individual board or commission members meeting with a constituent or lobbyist, or the governor or mayor exercising a veto or signing legislation, is not subject to the provisions of the Open Meetings Act. However, if an official is serving as a member of a body, then his or her conduct as such would be subject to the act.