|
Office of the Attorney General - State of Texas John Cornyn |
|
February 7, 2002 Ms. Lisa B. Silvia
OR2002-0575 Dear Ms. Silvia: You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 158279. The Fort Worth Independent School District (the "district") received a request for copies of statements regarding a specific investigation. You claim that the requested information is excepted from disclosure under sections 552.101 and 552.131 of the Government Code. We have considered the exceptions you claim and reviewed the submitted information. Initially, we note that the district's investigation file is a completed investigation, and normally must be released pursuant to section 552.022(a)(1) of the Government Code. Section 552.022 makes "a completed report, audit, evaluation, or investigation made of, for, or by a governmental body" public information unless expressly made confidential under other law or "except as provided by [s]ection 552.108[.]" Gov't Code § 552.022(a)(1). You claim the information in the district's investigation file is excepted from disclosure under section 552.131 of the Government Code. Please note that Section 552.131 of the Government Code, as added by chapter 1335, Act of the 76th Legislature, relating to certain information held by school districts, has been renumbered as section 552.135 of the Government Code. See Act of May 22, 2001, 77th Leg., R.S., H.B. 2812, § 21.001(54). Section 552.135 of the Government Code excepts certain information held by school districts from public disclosure. It reads as follows: (a) "Informer" means a student or former student or an employee or former employee of a school district who has furnished a report of another person's or persons' possible violation of criminal, civil, or regulatory law to the school district or the proper regulatory enforcement authority. (b) An informer's name or information that would substantially reveal the identity of an informer is excepted from the requirements of Section 552.021. (c) Subsection (b) does not apply: (1) if the informer is a student or former student, and the student or former student, or the legal guardian, or spouse of the student or former student consents to disclosure of the student's or former student's name; or (2) if the informer is an employee or former employee who consents to disclosure of the employee's or former employee's name; or (3) if the informer planned, initiated, or participated in the possible violation. (d) Information excepted under Subsection (b) may be made available to a law enforcement agency or prosecutor for official purposes of the agency or prosecutor upon proper request made in compliance with applicable law and procedure. (e) This section does not infringe on or impair the confidentiality of information considered to be confidential by law, whether it be constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision, including information excepted from the requirements of Section 552.021. Gov't Code § 552.135. Because the legislature limited the protection of section 552.135 to the identity of a person who reports a possible violation of "law," a school district that seeks to withhold information under that exception must clearly identify to this office the specific civil, criminal, or regulatory law that is alleged to have been violated. See Gov't Code § 552.301(e)(1)(A). You indicate that the conduct reported to the district relates to a possible violation of the regulatory law codified in title 19, chapter 247 of the Texas Administrative Code regarding the educator's code of ethics, District Policy DAA, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Based on our review of the submitted information, we agree that the informers have reported a possible violation of the Civil Rights Act. Thus, the district must withhold the portion of the submitted information that would substantially reveal the identity of the informer of a possible violation of "law" under section 552.135 of the Government Code. Accordingly, the district must withhold the information we have marked under section 552.135 of the Government Code. As we are able to make this determination, we need not address your remaining argument. Additionally, we note that section 552.117 of the Government Code excepts from disclosure the home addresses, telephone numbers, social security numbers, and family member information of current or former officials or employees of a governmental body who request that this information be kept confidential in accordance with section 552.024. Whether a particular piece of information is protected by section 552.117 must be determined at the time the request for it is made. See Open Records Decision No. 530 at 5 (1989). The district must withhold this type of information pursuant to section 552.117 only to the extent that the respective employee elected to keep this information confidential prior to the district's receipt of the current records request. Although such information is normally confidential under section 552.117, under section 552.023 of the Government Code a person or a person's authorized representative has a special right of access to records that contain information relating to the person that are protected from public disclosure by laws intended to protect that person's privacy interests. Therefore, the requestor has a special right of access to her home address, telephone number, social security number, and family member information and the district may not withhold this information in this instance. To summarize, the district must withhold the information we have marked under section 552.135 of the Government Code. The remainder of the submitted information must be released. This letter ruling is limited to the particular records at issue in this request and limited to the facts as presented to us; therefore, this ruling must not be relied upon as a previous determination regarding any other records or any other circumstances. This ruling triggers important deadlines regarding the rights and responsibilities of the governmental body and of the requestor. For example, governmental bodies are prohibited from asking the attorney general to reconsider this ruling. Gov't Code § 552.301(f). If the governmental body wants to challenge this ruling, the governmental body must appeal by filing suit in Travis County within 30 calendar days. Id. § 552.324(b). In order to get the full benefit of such an appeal, the governmental body must file suit within 10 calendar days. Id. § 552.353(b)(3), (c). If the governmental body does not appeal this ruling and the governmental body does not comply with it, then both the requestor and the attorney general have the right to file suit against the governmental body to enforce this ruling. Id. § 552.321(a). If this ruling requires the governmental body to release all or part of the requested information, the governmental body is responsible for taking the next step. Based on the statute, the attorney general expects that, within 10 calendar days of this ruling, the governmental body will do one of the following three things: 1) release the public records; 2) notify the requestor of the exact day, time, and place that copies of the records will be provided or that the records can be inspected; or 3) notify the requestor of the governmental body's intent to challenge this letter ruling in court. If the governmental body fails to do one of these three things within 10 calendar days of this ruling, then the requestor should report that failure to the attorney general's Open Government Hotline, toll free, at 877/673-6839. The requestor may also file a complaint with the district or county attorney. Id. § 552.3215(e). If this ruling requires or permits the governmental body to withhold all or some of the requested information, the requestor can appeal that decision by suing the governmental body. Id. § 552.321(a); Texas Department of Public Safety v. Gilbreath, 842 S.W.2d 408,411 (Tex. App.--Austin 1992, no writ). Please remember that under the Act the release of information triggers certain procedures for costs and charges to the requestor. If records are released in compliance with this ruling, be sure that all charges for the information are at or below the legal amounts. Questions or complaints about over-charging must be directed to Hadassah Schloss at the Texas Building and Procurement Commission at 512/475-2497. If the governmental body, the requestor, or any other person has questions or comments about this ruling, they may contact our office. Although there is no statutory deadline for contacting us, the attorney general prefers to receive any comments within 10 calendar days of the date of this ruling. Sincerely, W. Montgomery Meitler
c: Ms. Jerrie Phillips
POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB: WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US |