|
Office of the Attorney General - State of Texas John Cornyn |
|
August 28, 2002 Ms. Carol Longoria
OR2002-4814 Dear Ms. Longoria: You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 167876. The University of Texas at San Antonio ("UTSA") received a request for a variety of information related to the bid, auction, and/or purchase of a Bosendorfer Imperial Grand Piano from UTSA on or around October 2, 2000. You argue that the requested information is excepted from disclosure under section 552.103 of the Government Code. We have considered your claimed exception and have reviewed the submitted information. We have also considered the comments submitted to this office by the requestor. See Gov't Code § 552.304 (permitting interested party to submit reasons why requested information should or should not be released). Section 552.103 provides as follows: (a) Information is excepted from [required public disclosure] if it is information relating to litigation of a civil or criminal nature to which the state or a political subdivision is or may be a party or to which an officer or employee of the state or a political subdivision, as a consequence of the person's office or employment, is or may be a party. . . . . (c) Information relating to litigation involving a governmental body or an officer or employee of a governmental body is excepted from disclosure under Subsection (a) only if the litigation is pending or reasonably anticipated on the date that the requestor applies to the officer for public information for access to or duplication of the information. UTSA has the burden of providing relevant facts and documents to show that the section 552.103(a) exception is applicable in a particular situation. The test for meeting this burden is a showing that (1) litigation is pending or reasonably anticipated on the date the governmental body received the records request, and (2) the information at issue is related to that litigation. University of Tex. Law Sch. v. Texas Legal Found., 958 S.W.2d 479, 481 (Tex. App.--Austin 1997, no pet.); Heard v. Houston Post Co., 684 S.W.2d 210, 212 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1984, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Open Records Decision No. 551 at 4 (1990). UTSA must meet both prongs of this test for information to be excepted under 552.103(a). To establish that litigation is reasonably anticipated, a governmental body must provide this office "concrete evidence showing that the claim that litigation may ensue is more than mere conjecture." Open Records Decision No. 452 at 4 (1986). Concrete evidence to support a claim that litigation is reasonably anticipated may include, for example, the governmental body's receipt of a letter containing a specific threat to sue the governmental body from an attorney for a potential opposing party.(1) Open Records Decision No. 555 (1990); see Open Records Decision No. 518 at 5 (1989) (litigation must be "realistically contemplated"). On the other hand, this office has determined that if an individual publicly threatens to bring suit against a governmental body, but does not actually take objective steps toward filing suit, litigation is not reasonably anticipated. See Open Records Decision No. 331 (1982). Further, the fact that a potential opposing party has hired an attorney who makes a request for information does not establish that litigation is reasonably anticipated. Open Records Decision No. 361 (1983). Upon review of the information provided to this office, we are unable to conclude that litigation was reasonably anticipated in this matter by UTSA on the date it received the request for information. Therefore, the requested information may not be withheld under section 552.103. We note, however, that a portion of the submitted information contains account numbers that are subject to section 552.136 of the Government Code. Section 552.136 makes certain access device numbers confidential and provides, in pertinent part: (a) In this section, "access device" means a card, plate, code, account number, personal identification number, electronic serial number, mobile identification number, or other telecommunications service, equipment, or instrument identifier or means of account access that alone or in conjunction with another access device may be used to: (1) obtain money, goods, services, or another thing of value; or (2) initiate a transfer of funds other than a transfer originated solely by paper instrument. (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, a credit card, debit card, charge card, or access device number that is collected, assembled, or maintained by or for a governmental body is confidential. Gov't Code § 552.136. Accordingly, UTSA must withhold one of the account numbers contained within the submitted information that we have marked pursuant to section 552.136 of the Government Code. We note, however, that in this instance, the requestor has a special right of access to the account number belonging to her client, which we have also marked. See Gov't Code § 552.023(a) (person or authorized representative has a special right of access, beyond that of the general public, to information held by governmental body that pertains to person and that is protected from disclosure to public by laws intended to protect person's privacy interests). Information that is subject to a special right of access under section 552.023 may not be withheld from the requestor under section 552.136. However, should UTSA receive another request for this information from a person who would not have a right of access to it, UTSA should resubmit this same information and request another decision. We also note that the submitted information contains e-mail addresses that may be subject to section 552.137 of the Government Code. Section 552.137 makes certain e-mail addresses confidential and provides in pertinent part: (a) An e-mail address of a member of the public that is provided for the purpose of communicating electronically with a governmental body is confidential and not subject to disclosure under this chapter. (b) Confidential information described by this section that relates to a member of the public may be disclosed if the member of the public affirmatively consents to its release. Gov't Code § 552.137. Accordingly, unless the members of the public in question have affirmatively consented to their release, UTSA must withhold from disclosure the e-mail addresses we have marked in the submitted information pursuant to section 552.137 of the Government Code. To summarize, the requested information is not excepted under section 552.103 and therefore must be released to the requestor, with the exception of the marked e-mail addresses which may be excepted under section 552.137, and the account number we have marked, which must be withheld under section 552.136. 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, Michael A. Pearle
MAP/jh Ref: ID# 167876 Enc. Submitted documents c: Ms. Beverly West Irizarry
Footnotes 1. In addition, this office has concluded that litigation was reasonably anticipated when the potential opposing party took the following objective steps toward litigation: filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, see Open Records Decision No. 336 (1982); hired an attorney who made a demand for disputed payments and threatened to sue if the payments were not made promptly, see Open Records Decision No. 346 (1982); and threatened to sue on several occasions and hired an attorney, see Open Records Decision No. 288 (1981). POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB: WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US |