OOR orders broader search in four Middletown communications appeals
OOR ordered a broader search in four Middletown communications appeals after finding the borough’s evidence did not establish a complete search.
Middletown Borough must conduct a supplemental search for communications after Pennsylvania’s Office of Open Records found that the borough had not established that responsive records did not exist. The October 20 determination granted four consolidated appeals filed by Amanda Whitebread. [S5, pp. 6–7]
The case combines AP 2026-4085, AP 2026-4090, AP 2026-4091 and AP 2026-4097. Whitebread submitted the four requests on September 15 and 18. They sought specified communications involving Councilman James Curry and named people, with date ranges and, for several requests, keyword lists. [S5, pp. 1–3]
The requests covered email, text messages, call logs and communications on third-party services. They expressly included personal devices and private accounts used for the communications described in the requests. The borough denied the requests on the ground that it did not possess responsive records. [S5, pp. 1–3]
The borough’s evidence described a search by its open-records officer and directions to Curry to search his records, personal devices and private communications accounts. The OOR found a gap: the evidence did not show that other council members had also been directed to search their devices. [S5, pp. 5–6]
Appeals Officer Julie Sodl concluded that potentially responsive communications did not necessarily have to include Curry. On that basis, the borough had not demonstrated a search reasonably calculated to locate the requested records or establish that none existed. [S5, p. 6]
The determination directed a supplemental good-faith search and production of any records discovered. Its conclusion required the search within 30 days. The OOR expressly said it was not ordering the creation of records that the borough did not possess. [S5, pp. 6–7]
The access ruling should not be read as a finding that allegations embedded in the requests were proven. It resolves the adequacy of the borough’s search. RTK Media has not independently examined the underlying communications or verified whether a later search produced records. Subsequent compliance and court-review status remain unverified.
Official sources
- S5: Amanda Whitebread v. Middletown Borough — AP 2026-4085 (consolidated); 2026-10-20. Archived official PDF.
Don’t Speculate. Document.