Alaska

The OMA does not define "executive session." It obviously refers to a meeting closed to the public. What is not clear is whether and to what extent non-members can be allowed to attend executive sessions. E.g., can staff attend? Can a mayor or school superintendent?

There is no statutory provision for priority for records requests, although the courts have been solicitous of public record requests by news organizations when suits have been filed in the past.

Overview

Alaska

Though there are no cases that go directly to the point of the openness of arrest records in Alaska, the court’s ruling in Johnson v. State could be interpreted to apply. Rule 37.5 lists exceptions of court records that are not considered open. Arrest records are not included in the list of exceptions, and therefore, according to the holding in Johnson, should be considered open. Johnson v. State, 50 P.3d 404, 406 (Alaska App. 2002), citing Kenai v. Kenai Peninsula Newspapers Inc., 642 P.2d 1316, 1323 (Alaska 1982).

Various programs exist to promote economic development through government agencies.  Provisions concerning access to or confidentiality of documents submitted to or generated by such agencies in connection with these programs is addressed in a number of sections of this outline.  Among these are, e.g., sections II. B 6(b) and II. B. 23(d), addressing Bidcos (business and industrial development corporations), sections II.B.28, addressing the Alaska Industrial Development Authority, and section II.B.27(e), addressing tourism data.

Alaska law does not purport to limit access based on why or on whose behalf the records are sought, or based on the use to be made of the records. See AS 40.25.120. However, in certain unique circumstances, the requester's purpose may have an effect. For example, when public records are sought by a litigant, the litigant's right of access is governed by court rules concerning discovery rather than by the Public Records Act, AS 40.25.122, and use of records so obtained may be subject to limitations imposed by the court in that context. See Jones v. Jennings.

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 photograph. Photography in the courts is considered a privilege governed by court rules.

The usual considerations that go into settling rather than litigating disputes will often come into play with respect to issues relating to access to public records.

Overview

Alaska

The Alaska Rules of Administration set out the control of court records in Rule 37.5. The rule states that records are presumptively open to the public, but does not specify a difference between the openness of civil and criminal records.

Although compliance by law enforcement agencies is uneven, 911 tapes should be presumptively disclosable under the Public Records Act.  The Legislature has considered a bill that would exempt 911 tapes from coverage of the Public Records Act, but as of publication of the 2011 edition, had failed to pass it.