(gr)

City of Seattle

Seattle Police Department

 

September 6, 2016

Kurt Fraser

Public Disclosure Appeal

Re
Dear Mr. Fraser:

The Seattle Police Department (SPD) Legal Unit has completed the administrative review of your
appeal at the SPD Public Disclosure Unit's (PDU) response to your public disclosure request
dated May 20, 2015. Your request asked for "all records pertaining to lnteNiewS conducted by
Detective in the course of and relating to his 2014 review."

Followmg a comprehensive review of records, SPD Legal has determined that the Public
Disclosure Unit's response shall be upheld. PDU provided you With the follow-up report for the
event requested No other records related to the follow-up Investigation have been located. As a
courtesy, Will provide you with another copy of the tollowyup report, which is also readily
available online on the SPD Blotter.

The Washington Public Records Act, ROW 42 56, requires agencies to respond to requests to
"identifiable public records," RCW 42.56.080. The Act does not require agencies to research or
explain public records, but only to make those records accessible to the public Smith 
Okanogsn Cy857 (2000), citing Bonamy v. City of Seattle. 92 Wn
App. 403, 409, 960 P.2d 447 (1995), rev denied, 137 Wn.2d1012,978 2d1099(1999), "An
agency has no duty under the PRA to respond to questions or to create or produce a record that
does not exist.' ld., see also, Sperr City or Spokane,123 Wn. App 132, 136-137, 96 3d 1012
(2004) An agency's obligation under the PRA arises only when there has been a specilic request
tor records that exist, Wood v. Lowe,102 Wn App 872, 876-77, 10 P.3d 494 (2000).

This correspondence closes your appeal with SPD. Please contact the SPD Legal Unit, at
it you have any questions and/or if my understanding of your appeal is incorrect

Sincerely,

Kathleen O'Toole
Chief of Police

 

tegic Legal Advisor
SPD Legal Unit

 

Seattle Police Department.