Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 192.329 (2026)

Public body’s response to public records request

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      192.329 Public body’s response to public records request. (1) A public body shall complete its response to a written public records request that is received by an individual identified in the public body’s procedure described in ORS 192.324 as soon as practicable and without unreasonable delay.

      (2) A public body’s response to a public records request is complete when the public body:

      (a) Provides access to or copies of all requested records within the possession or custody of the public body that the public body does not assert are exempt from public disclosure, or explains where the records are already publicly available;

      (b) Asserts any exemptions from disclosure that the public body believes apply to any requested records and, if the public body cites ORS 192.355 (8) or (9), identifies the state or federal law that the public body relied on in asserting the exemptions;

      (c) Complies with ORS 192.338;

      (d) To the extent that the public body is not the custodian of records that have been requested, provides a written statement to that effect;

      (e) To the extent that state or federal law prohibits the public body from acknowledging whether any requested record exists or that acknowledging whether a requested record exists would result in the loss of federal benefits or imposition of another sanction, provides a written statement to that effect, citing the state or federal law that the public body relies on, unless the written statement itself would violate state or federal law; and

      (f) If the public body asserts that one or more requested records are exempt from public disclosure, includes a statement that the requester may seek review of the public body’s determination pursuant to ORS 192.401, 192.411, 192.415, 192.418, 192.422, 192.427 and 192.431.

      (3)(a) If a public body has informed a requester of a fee permitted under ORS 192.324 (4), the obligation of the public body to complete its response to the request is suspended until the requester has paid the fee, the fee has been waived by the public body pursuant to ORS 192.324 (5) or the fee otherwise has been ordered waived.

      (b) If the requester fails to pay the fee within 60 days of the date on which the public body informed the requester of the fee, or fails to pay the fee within 60 days of the date on which the public body informed the requester of the denial of the fee waiver, the public body shall close the request.

      (4)(a) A public body may request additional information or clarification from a requester of public records for the purpose of expediting the public body’s response to the request. If the public body has requested additional information or clarification in good faith, the public body’s obligation to further complete its response to the request is suspended until the requester provides the requested information or clarification or affirmatively declines to provide that information or clarification.

      (b) If the requester fails to respond within 60 days to a good faith request from the public body for information or clarification, the public body shall close the request.

      (5) As soon as reasonably possible but not later than 10 business days after the date by which a public body is required to acknowledge receipt of the request under ORS 192.324, a public body shall:

      (a) Complete its response to the public records request; or

      (b) Provide a written statement that the public body is still processing the request and a reasonable estimated date by which the public body expects to complete its response based on the information currently available.

      (6) The time periods established by ORS 192.324 and subsection (5) of this section do not apply to a public body if compliance would be impracticable because:

      (a) The staff or volunteers necessary to complete a response to the public records request are unavailable;

      (b) Compliance would demonstrably impede the public body’s ability to perform other necessary services; or

      (c) Of the volume of public records requests being simultaneously processed by the public body.

      (7) For purposes of this section, staff members or volunteers who are on leave or are not scheduled to work are considered to be unavailable.

      (8) A public body that cannot comply with the time periods established by ORS 192.324 and subsection (5) of this section for a reason listed in subsection (6) of this section shall, as soon as practicable and without unreasonable delay, acknowledge a public records request and complete the response to the request. [2017 c.456 §4]

 

      Note: 192.329, 192.335 and 192.340 were added to and made a part of 192.311 to 192.478 by legislative action but were not added to any smaller series therein. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2021–2025 · leading case: Merrick v. City of Portland, 496 P.3d 1085 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Merrick v. City of Portland, 496 P.3d 1085 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). “407(1)(a), (b); ORS 192.329(1). Likewise, a requester may petition the district attorney in “[a]ny other instance in which the [requester] believes that the public body has failed to comply” with its duties to process a request.”
Peta v. Ohsu, 346 Or. App. 38 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 5× “the public body to pay a penalty of $200 to the requester if the [decisionmaker] determines that the public body responded to the request with undue delay or failed to respond to the request,” and • “[O]rder a fee waiver or a fee reduction if a public body has responded to the…”
Upham v. Hummel, 508 P.3d 75 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 16× “See ORS 192.329(1) (providing that responses to fee requests should be processed that way).”
Lincoln v. Sweet Home Fire & Ambulance Dist. (D. Or. 2025). · cites it 5× “Sixth Claim – ORS 192.329 Plaintiff Sixth Claim alleges that Tyler and Doney violated ORS 192.”
Peta v. Ohsu, 346 Or. App. 38 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 5× “OHSU the public body responded to the request with undue delay or failed to respond to the request,” and • “[O]rder a fee waiver or a fee reduction if a public body has responded to the request with undue delay or has failed to respond to the request in the time and manner…”
Bong v. Douglas Ed. Serv. Dist., 342 Or. App. 1 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 3× “324(4)(a), and that ESD’s refusal to produce records within its custody violates ORS 192.329. Because there is a genuine dispute of material fact as to both issues, we reverse and remand.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 192.329(1) — 5 cases
Merrick v. City of Portland, 496 P.3d 1085 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). “407(1)(a), (b); ORS 192.329(1). Likewise, a requester may petition the district attorney in “[a]ny other instance in which the [requester] believes that the public body has failed to comply” with its duties to process a request.”
Peta v. Ohsu, 346 Or. App. 38 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “the public body to pay a penalty of $200 to the requester if the [decisionmaker] determines that the public body responded to the request with undue delay or failed to respond to the request,” and • “[O]rder a fee waiver or a fee reduction if a public body has responded to the…”
Peta v. Ohsu, 346 Or. App. 38 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “OHSU the public body responded to the request with undue delay or failed to respond to the request,” and • “[O]rder a fee waiver or a fee reduction if a public body has responded to the request with undue delay or has failed to respond to the request in the time and manner…”
Lincoln v. Sweet Home Fire & Ambulance Dist. (D. Or. 2025). “Sixth Claim – ORS 192.329 Plaintiff Sixth Claim alleges that Tyler and Doney violated ORS 192.”
Upham v. Hummel, 508 P.3d 75 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “See ORS 192.329(1) (providing that responses to fee requests should be processed that way).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 192.329(2)(b) — 1 case
Upham v. Hummel, 508 P.3d 75 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “See ORS 192.329(1) (providing that responses to fee requests should be processed that way).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 192.329(3)(a) — 1 case
Upham v. Hummel, 508 P.3d 75 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “See ORS 192.329(1) (providing that responses to fee requests should be processed that way).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 192.329(4)(b) — 1 case
Upham v. Hummel, 508 P.3d 75 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “See ORS 192.329(1) (providing that responses to fee requests should be processed that way).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 192.329(5) — 3 cases
Peta v. Ohsu, 346 Or. App. 38 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “the public body to pay a penalty of $200 to the requester if the [decisionmaker] determines that the public body responded to the request with undue delay or failed to respond to the request,” and • “[O]rder a fee waiver or a fee reduction if a public body has responded to the…”
Peta v. Ohsu, 346 Or. App. 38 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “OHSU the public body responded to the request with undue delay or failed to respond to the request,” and • “[O]rder a fee waiver or a fee reduction if a public body has responded to the request with undue delay or has failed to respond to the request in the time and manner…”
Upham v. Hummel, 508 P.3d 75 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “See ORS 192.329(1) (providing that responses to fee requests should be processed that way).”
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.