 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS GREG ABBOTT | |
|
January 12, 2004 Ms. Nancy Nelson
OR2004-0240 Dear Ms. Nelson: You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 194167. The El Paso Community College District (the "district") received a request for sales history information regarding food concessions at particular campuses and "[a]ny other pertinent information that will help [the requestor] in the preparation of the bid." You state that some of the requested information has been released. However, you claim that the submitted sales history information and contract with the current concession holder are excepted from disclosure under section 552.104 of the Government Code. In addition, you have notified third party Subway Real Estate Corporation and Subway Franchise ("Subway") of the request and of its opportunity to submit comments to this office. See Gov't Code § 552.305 (permitting interested third party to submit to attorney general reasons why requested information should not be released); Open Records Decision No. 542 (1990) (determining that statutory predecessor to section 552.305 permits governmental body to rely on interested third party to raise and explain applicability of exception to disclosure in certain circumstances). We have considered all claimed exceptions and reviewed the submitted information. Initially, we note that an interested third party is allowed ten business days after the date of its receipt of the governmental body's notice under section 552.305(d) to submit its reasons, if any, as to why requested information relating to that party should be withheld from disclosure. See Gov't Code § 552.305(d)(2)(B). As of the date of this letter, Subway has not submitted any comments to this office explaining how release of the requested information would affect its proprietary interests. Therefore, Subway has provided us with no basis to conclude that it has a protected proprietary interest in any of the submitted information. See Gov't Code § 551.110(b) (to prevent disclosure of commercial or financial information, party must show by specific factual or evidentiary material, not conclusory or generalized allegations, that it actually faces competition and that substantial competitive injury would likely result from disclosure); Open Records Decision Nos. 639 at 4 (1996), 552 at 5 (1990) (party must establish prima facie case that information is trade secret), 542 at 3 (1990). We turn now to the district's arguments. Section 552.104 states that information is excepted from required public disclosure if release of the information would give advantage to a competitor or bidder. The purpose of this exception is to protect the interests of a governmental body, usually in competitive bidding situations. See Open Records Decision No. 592 (1991). This exception protects information from public disclosure if the governmental body demonstrates potential harm to its interests in a particular competitive situation. See Open Records Decision No. 463 (1987). However, this office has long held that "[r]elease of the bids while the bidding is still competitive would necessarily result in an advantage to certain bidders at the expense of others and could be detrimental to the public interest in the contract being let." Open Records Decision No. 170 at 2 (1977). Generally, section 552.104 does not except bids from public disclosure after bidding is completed and a contract is in effect. See, e.g., Open Records Decision Nos. 541 (1990), 514 (1988), 306 (1982), 184 (1978), 75 (1975). In this instance, you inform us that the submitted information "is part of an on-going procedure that has not yet been completed." We note, however, that the information at issue does not consist of bids concerning the on-going bidding process. Furthermore, we find that you have failed to explain how release of the district's current contract or information relating to past sales would give an advantage to a competitor in the current bidding process or otherwise harm the district's interest in this process. See Gov't Code §552.301(e)(1)(A) (requiring governmental body to explain applicability of exceptions ). Therefore, we conclude that the submitted information is not excepted from disclosure based on section 552.104. As you claim no other exceptions for the submitted information and it is not otherwise confidential by law, it must be released to the requestor. 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 Dep't of Pub. 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. We note that a third party may challenge this ruling by filing suit seeking to withhold information from a requestor. Gov't Code § 552.325. 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, Denis C. McElroy
c: Mr. Octavio Gildo
Ms. Carole Adams
POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB:WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US |