Welcome to

Bath Borough

Northampton County, PA

Docket #2026-2665 (ACTIVE)

Last modified:
August 4, 2026 9:54 am

RTK Request #09.2026 – Financial and Accounting Records

Request Received: May 15, 2026
Final Response Issued: June 19, 2026
Appeal Filed: July 2, 2026
OOR Docket: AP 2026-2665

Requester: Michael Long

Summary

On May 15, 2026, the Borough received Right-to-Know Request #09.2026 seeking numerous categories of financial and accounting records spanning approximately nine years (January 1, 2017, through May 14, 2026). The request included bank statements, reconciliation reports, QuickBooks reports, audit trail reports, journal entry reports, developer escrow records, chart of accounts information, retained earnings reports, developer escrow agreements, and fiscal year 2025 audit materials.

Due to the scope and complexity of the request, the Borough invoked the thirty-day extension authorized under Section 902 of Pennsylvania’s Right-to-Know Law in order to conduct a comprehensive review of its records.

The Borough’s search included active and archived paper records, electronic accounting records, historical QuickBooks files, inactive escrow accounts, prior Right-to-Know productions, historical financial records, and consultation with multiple Borough personnel familiar with the requested records. Where necessary, the Borough also contacted its financial institutions regarding the availability of historical bank statements beyond the institution’s retention period.

Processing RTK Request #09.2026 required the identification, review, and organization of more than 4,666 pages of responsive material, including approximately:

  • 3,785 photocopied pages; and
  • 881 electronically produced PDF pages.

Where responsive records contained information exempt from public disclosure under the Right-to-Know Law, only the exempt information was redacted and the remaining portions of the records were produced where practicable. Certain requested records had previously been provided to the requester through earlier Right-to-Know requests and were identified accordingly.

The Borough issued its Final Response on June 19, 2026.

On July 2, 2026, the requester appealed the Borough’s response to the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records, where the matter has been docketed as OOR Appeal AP 2026-2665.

The Borough is represented in this appeal by Special Right-to-Know Counsel Chad Schnee, Esquire.

Why appeals matter

Responding to Right-to-Know requests is an important responsibility under Pennsylvania law, and the Borough remains committed to providing public access to records in accordance with the RTKL.

Large and complex requests, however, often require substantial staff time to identify, retrieve, review, organize, redact exempt information where required, consult with legal counsel, and prepare records for release. When appeals are filed with the Office of Open Records, the Borough must also devote additional administrative time and incur legal expenses associated with preparing affidavits, legal submissions, and supporting documentation.

The purpose of maintaining this page is to provide residents with transparency regarding the scope of significant Right-to-Know requests and appeals, the administrative resources required to respond to them, and the status of ongoing proceedings.

Current Status (Updated July 17, 2026)

  • Appeal filed with the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records.
  • The Office of Open Records established a briefing schedule.
  • The Borough submitted its legal position, affidavits, and supporting evidence on July 16, 2026.
  • The requester may submit a reply as permitted by the OOR.
  • The Appeals Officer will issue a written Final Determination after reviewing the record.

Because this appeal remains pending, the Borough will limit updates on this page to procedural developments, summaries of publicly filed materials, and factual information concerning the Borough’s response. The Office of Open Records will independently determine the merits of the appeal.

What the Borough Produced

Production SummaryPages
Responsive material identified/reviewed4,666+ pages
Responsive paper pages identified and made available subject to applicable fees3,785 pages
Responsive electronic pages identified881 pages
Final ResponseJune 19, 2026
Records withheld in fullVery limited
Records partially redactedOnly where exempt under RTKL

Certain QuickBooks reports contained narrative notes or explanatory entries associated with internal accounting and audit workpapers. Where applicable, only those narrative portions believed exempt under the RTKL were redacted while all financial data, account information, dates, journal entries, and dollar amounts were produced.

The appeal generally concerns:

  • certain redactions made to QuickBooks reports;
  • whether additional records exist;
  • the Borough’s application of several RTKL exemptions; and
  • the adequacy of the Borough’s search for responsive records.

Processing this request required:

  • retrieval of records spanning approximately nine years;
  • review of archived paper and electronic files;
  • consultation with multiple Borough employees;
  • consultation with the Borough’s financial institution regarding historical records;
  • legal review by Special Right-to-Know Counsel;
  • preparation of detailed indexes and affidavits for the appeal.

An appeal filed with the Office of Open Records does not mean the Borough violated the Right-to-Know Law. The appeal process allows an independent Appeals Officer to review disputed issues and determine whether the Borough properly applied the RTKL.

Because this matter remains pending before the Office of Open Records, this page is intended solely to provide procedural updates and publicly available information. It is not intended to discuss the merits of the pending appeal or influence the outcome of the proceeding. The Office of Open Records will independently determine the merits of the appeal.

Current Status (Updated August 2, 2026)

On August 1, the Requester submitted (on a closed record) an additional supplemental memorandum asking the Office of Open Records to close the evidentiary record and rule on a number of alleged deficiencies concerning record identification, electronic versus paper production, duplication fees, the adequacy of the Borough’s search, and limited redactions applied to certain financial records. The filing also argues that the Borough’s decision not to submit additional evidence by OOR’s July 31 supplemental deadline should weigh against the Borough and characterizes the Borough as having failed to meaningfully participate in addressing the Requester’s subsequent filings.

The Borough disagrees with that characterization. The Borough participated in the appeal by retaining special Right-to-Know counsel, filing a Position Statement, and submitting a detailed sworn affidavit from the Borough’s Open Records Officer explaining the search for responsive records and the basis for the Borough’s response. The Borough conducted a substantial search, identified thousands of pages of responsive records, provided electronic records where responsive records were maintained and available electronically, identified physical records located through file storage and historical retrieval, and asserted limited exemptions and redactions where applicable.

The Borough’s decision not to respond to every subsequent supplemental filing should not be confused with a failure to participate in the appeal. OOR provided the Borough an opportunity to supplement its submission through July 31; after reviewing the additional filings, the Borough and its special counsel elected to stand on the evidentiary record already submitted. The Requester’s August 1 filing seeks to characterize that decision as evidentiary nonparticipation and asks OOR to draw adverse conclusions from it.

Many of the Requester’s supplemental arguments also rely upon records and responses associated with prior Right-to-Know requests in an effort to compare the Borough’s historical production practices with its response to RTKL Request #09.2026. The Borough’s position remains that the present appeal should be evaluated based upon the specific records requested, the records actually maintained and located by the Borough, the search conducted in response to this particular request, and the evidence submitted concerning that response.

The matter remains pending before the Office of Open Records, and no final determination has been issued.

Current Status (Updated August 4, 2026)

The appeal remains pending before the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records.

The Borough submitted its initial Position Statement and sworn affidavit on July 17, 2026. Since that filing, the Requester has submitted more than 2,600 additional pages of supplemental material, bringing the Requester’s total filings in this appeal to more than 3,000 pages.

On August 1, 2026, the Requester filed a three-part supplemental submission consisting of a 35-page Final Supplemental Memorandum, a 16-page appendix of OOR decisions addressing agency nonparticipation, and a 529-page appendix containing judicial decisions and OOR Final Determinations cited in support of the Requester’s arguments.

On August 4, 2026, the Borough filed a short supplemental Position Statement and reaffirming affidavit addressing several discrete issues raised in the Requester’s supplemental filings. The Borough also submitted two letters from its financial institution documenting $10 and $35 in historical account-research charges, together with the Borough’s detailed Record Matrix used in processing RTKL Request #09.2026.

The supplemental Borough filing also corrected an earlier page-count reference from 3,965 paper pages to the correct figure of 3,785 responsive paper pages. The Borough maintains that an additional 881 pages of responsive records were identified in electronic format at no duplication charge.

The Appeals Officer will independently review the complete evidentiary record and issue a written Final Determination.

The August 4 submission expressly documents the two bank charges and explains that many older financial records were maintained solely in paper financial files before the Borough began routinely retaining digital copies of reports around 2022. The filing also addresses the Requester’s later-raised argument concerning metadata.

OOR APPEAL DOCKET ENTRIES (32 Entries)

Filed DateDescription
08/04/2026Agency Submission (1 Page) Responsive Record Matrix; Item-by-item summary of responsive record categories, record medium, prior production, page counts, fees, and explanatory notes
08/04/2026Agency Submission (1 Page) Bank Charges as of June 15, 2026; Documentation supporting $35 historical bank research charge
08/04/2026Agency Submission (1 Page) Bank Charges as of June 2, 2026; Documentation supporting $10 historical bank research charge
08/04/2026Agency Submission (3 Pages) Supplemental Position Statement and reaffirming affidavit addressing record medium, historical recordkeeping practices, bank research fees, page-count clarification, and metadata
08/01/2026Requestor Position Statement (529 Pages) Requestor’s Supplemental Legal Law Library
08/01/2026Requestor Position Statement (16 Pages)
08/01/2026Requester Position Statement (35 Pages)
07/21/2026Requester Position Statement (75 Pages)
07/21/2026Requester Position Statement (157 Pages)
07/21/2026Requester Position Statement (173 Pages)
07/21/2026Requester Position Statement (196 Pages)
07/21/2026Requester Submission (1 Page)
07/21/2026Requester Submission (1 Page)
07/21/2026Requester Position Statement (1,398 Pages) Requester’s Law Library of relied upon propositions.
07/21/2026Requester Position Statement (2 Pages)
07/21/2026Requester Position Statement (35 Pages) Requester Supplemental Position Statement.
07/21/2026Requester Position Statement (1 Page)
07/21/2026Requester Position Statement (14 Pages)
07/21/2026Requester Position Statement (6 Pages) Requestor Supplemental Position Statement.
07/17/2026Agency Correspondence (1 page)
07/17/2026Agency Submission (12 pages)
07/17/2026OOR Confirming No Agency Submission (1 page)
07/17/2026Requestor Correspondence (1 page)
07/17/2026Requester Position Statement (334 pages)
07/16/2026RECORD CLOSED
07/13/2026Requester Correspondence (4 Pages)
07/09/2026Agency Entry of Appearance (1 Page)
07/07/2026OOR Additional Extension (1 Page)
07/07/2026OOR Acknowledgement (7 Pages)
07/07/2026OOR Notice of Deadlines (1 Page)
07/06/2026Requester Appeal (70 Pages)
07/06/2026Requester Appeal (2 Pages)
07/02/2026Requester Appeal (73 Pages)

Print Friendly, PDF & Email