MISSISSIPPI Orrice oF Genenat. Couns RosexrT. Jou August 2, 2017 RE: Public Records Request for Hugh Freeze Phone Records Dear Ms. Moskovitz: | write this letter in response to your recent request under the Mississippi Public Records Act (“MPRA”) for the telephone records of Hugh Freeze. Along with your request, we have received a number of similar requests. Responding timely to these and other recent public records requests in a way that ensures transparency at a reasonable cost has proven a challenge for three reasons, First, the sheer number of recent public records requests has outstripped our capacity 10 timely respond. We have had to tur to outside counsel to assist us. Second, federal privacy law requires us to protect the privacy of students. Thus, we are required to redact the phone numbers associated with current or former university students, The task of reviewing thousands of phone calls to determine which numbers belong to students is a massive undertaking. Third and finally, because of the time necessary to review and redact student numbers, responding to your request will prove quite costly. Ordinarily, these costs are passed along to the person requesting public records. Consistent with the University’s commitment to transparency and in an effort to comply with our obligations under federal privacy law, we have worked hard to find a way to timely respond with as much information as possible at a reasonable cost for you. To that end, we will respond to your request and similar requests as follows. First, cell phones used by athletics personnel, including Hugh Freeze, are provided by the Ole Miss Athletics Foundation rather than by the University. As you may know, Mississippi law prohibits personal use of state-issued cell phones and requires elaborate and time-consuming reconciliation of all activities on state cell phones. As a result, very few University employees use state-issued phones. This has been the case for about ten years. In Athletics, however, we must monitor business-related phone calls. To ensure compliance with both state laws regarding cell phones and NCAA rules, the Ole Miss Athletics Foundation supplies telephones for use by athletics staff and provides the University detailed usage information designed to meet our compliance needs. Under these circumstances, the records related to Hugh Freeze’s business use of any cell phone (use in the conduct, transaction or performance of any business, transaction, 209 Lyoeum | P.O, Box 1848 | Univesity, MS 38677-1848 | (662) 15-7014 | rjoly@olemiss.edu | www.olemiss.eduwork, duty or function of UM) are considered public records and will be released. Any personal calls having no relation to UM business are not public records. Personal calls will be clearly marked and redacted from the documents released. Second, we have estimated that it will cost more than $20,000 to review all of Hugh Freeze’s cell records to redact student numbers. This estimate is based upon the actual cost our outside law firm provided the University for this review (based on a rate of nearly three calls per minute). But we have concluded it is not fair or equitable to pass along this cost to you or any other single requester. As a result, the University has undertaken this review at its own expense. We are in the process of compiling the necessary information to develop a protocol to electronically search for and redact phones numbers associated with current and former students. We anticipate the process to compile and electronically review the information will take fourteen (14) days In sum, we anticipate providing you all responsive records at no cost once the review is complete. The responsive records will include all business calls, but the phone numbers of current and former students will be redacted. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Sincerely, DEA Robert T. Jolly Assistant General Counsel