Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 149
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 149.39 (2026)

Records commission - municipal corporation

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
September 29, 2011
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 153 - 129th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

There is hereby created in each municipal corporation a records commission composed of the chief executive or the chief executive's appointed representative, as chairperson, and the chief fiscal officer, the chief legal officer, and a citizen appointed by the chief executive. The commission shall appoint a secretary, who may or may not be a member of the commission and who shall serve at the pleasure of the commission. The commission may employ an archivist or records manager to serve under its direction. The commission shall meet at least once every six months and upon the call of the chairperson.

The functions of the commission shall be to provide rules for retention and disposal of records of the municipal corporation, and to review applications for one-time disposal of obsolete records and schedules of records retention and disposition submitted by municipal offices. The commission may dispose of records pursuant to the procedure outlined in section 149.381 of the Revised Code. The commission, at any time, may review any schedule it has previously approved and, for good cause shown, may revise that schedule under the procedure outlined in that section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2000–2023 · leading case: Keller v. City of Columbus, 797 N.E.2d 964 (Ohio 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Keller v. City of Columbus, 797 N.E.2d 964 (Ohio 2003). · cites it 5× “R.C. 149.39 provides that “[w]hen municipal records have been approved for disposal, a list of such records shall be sent to the auditor of state.”
State ex rel. Keller v. Columbus, 843 N.E.2d 838 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. 2005). · cites it 7× “Appellants alleged that the CBA would violate the PRA because, unlike R.C. 149.39, (1) it does not provide to the City Records Commission (“commission”) power to revise the document-retention schedule, (2) it would allow destruction of documents without the required review by…”
Rhodes v. City of New Philadelphia, 2011-Ohio-3279, 951 N.E.2d 782. “See R.C. 149.39 (creating city records commissions to provide rules for retention and disposal of records).”
State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. City of Columbus, 734 N.E.2d 797 (Ohio 2000). · cites it 3× “R.C. 149.39 provides: “There is hereby created in each municipal corporation a records commission “The functions of the commission shall be to provide rules for retention and disposal of records of the municipal corporation and to review applications for one-time records…”
State ex rel. Davila v. City of Bucyrus, 2011-Ohio-1731, 956 N.E.2d 332. “By not timely responding to the request for admissions, respondents admitted, by default, that they had violated R.C. 149.39 and were liable to Davila in the amount of $1,000 for each missing tape recording.”
State ex rel. Davila v. Bellefontaine, 2011-Ohio-4890. “tends that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment in favor of the respondents when it found that there were genuine issues of fact regarding whether the respondents properly passed record retention schedules, disposed of a number of tapes in accordance with those…”
State ex rel. Crenshaw v. King, 2021-Ohio-4433. · cites it 4× “Background On December 9, 2021, Crenshaw filed the complaint where she alleged that King and his administration destroyed public records in violation of R.C. 149.39 and 149.381. She alleged that King has failed to establish or properly maintain a records commission and has…”
State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. Columbus, 90 Ohio St. 3d 39 (2000). · cites it 3× “{¶ 24} R.C. 149.39 provides: “There is hereby created in each municipal corporation a records commission * * *.”
DeCrane v. Cleveland, 2018-Ohio-3650. “See R.C. 149.39 (Records commission shall “provide rules for retention and disposal of records of the municipal corporation”); R.”
Martin v. New Philadelphia Police Dept., 2023-Ohio-1491. “2017-00808PQ, 2018-Ohio- 1581, ¶ 16 (no jurisdiction over claims under R.C. 149.39 and R.C. 149.40). {¶6} R.C. 149.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.