 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS GREG ABBOTT | |
|
January 15, 2004 Ms. Raethella Jones
OR2004-0337 Dear Ms. Jones: You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 194499. The Brazoria County Sheriff's Department (the "sheriff") received a request for information pertaining to a specified incident involving the alleged use of excessive force. You claim that the requested information is excepted from disclosure pursuant to section 552.103 of the Government Code. We have considered the exception you claim and have reviewed the submitted information. Initially, we note that a portion of the submitted information is subject to section 552.022 of the Government Code. Section 552.022 provides that: the following categories of information are public information and not excepted from required disclosure under this chapter unless they are expressly confidential under other law: (1) a completed report, audit, evaluation, or investigation made of, for, or by a governmental body, except as provided by Section 552.108[.] Gov't Code § 552.022(a)(1). We have marked the portion of the submitted information that is subject to section 552.022(a)(1) of the Government Code. This particular information must be released to the requestor, unless it is excepted from disclosure under section 552.108 of the Government Code or is expressly confidential under other law.(1) Although the sheriff claims that this particular information is excepted from disclosure under section 552.103 of the Government Code, we note that section 552.103 is a discretionary exception to disclosure that does not constitute "other law" for the purposes of section 552.022.(2) Accordingly, we conclude that the sheriff may not withhold any portion of this particular information under section 552.103 of the Government Code. Consequently, the sheriff must release this marked section 552.022(a)(1) information to the requestor. We now address your section 552.103 claim with regard to the remaining submitted information. Section 552.103 of the Government Code provides in part: (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. Gov't Code § 552.103(a), (c). The sheriff maintains the burden of providing relevant facts and documents sufficient to establish the applicability of section 552.103 to the information that it seeks to withhold from disclosure. To meet this burden, the sheriff must demonstrate: (1) that litigation was pending or reasonably anticipated on the date of its receipt of the request and (2) that the information at issue is related to that litigation. See University of Tex. Law Sch. v. Texas Legal Found., 958 S.W.2d 479 (Tex. App. - Austin 1997, no pet.); Heard v. Houston Post Co., 684 S.W.2d 210 (Tex. App. - Houston [1st Dist.] 1984, writ ref'd n.r.e.); see also Open Records Decision No. 551 at 4 (1990). Both elements of the test must be met in order for information to be excepted from disclosure under section 552.103. See id. In demonstrating that litigation is reasonably anticipated, the sheriff must furnish concrete evidence that litigation is realistically contemplated and is more than mere conjecture. See Open Records Decision No. 518 at 5 (1989). 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.(3) See Open Records Decision No. 555 (1990); see also Open Records Decision No. 518 at 5 (1989) (litigation must be "realistically contemplated"). Conversely, 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. See Open Records Decision No. 361 (1983). Whether litigation is reasonably anticipated must be determined on case-by-case basis. See Open Records Decision No. 452 at 4 (1986). You indicate that the sheriff anticipates litigation in this matter based on the fact that the request for information was included within an attorney's letter and because the letter alleges that excessive force was used. After carefully reviewing your arguments and the remaining submitted information, we find that the sheriff has failed to adequately demonstrate that it reasonably anticipated litigation with regard to this matter on the date that it received this request for information. Accordingly, we conclude that the sheriff may not withhold any portion of the remaining submitted information under section 552.103 of the Government Code. However, we note that the remaining submitted information contains social security numbers that may be excepted from disclosure pursuant to section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with federal law.(4) The 1990 amendments to the federal Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(c)(2)(C)(viii)(I), make confidential social security numbers and related records that are obtained or maintained by a state agency or political subdivision of the state pursuant to any provision of law enacted on or after October 1, 1990. See Open Records Decision No. 622 (1994). The sheriff has cited no law, nor are we aware of any law, enacted on or after October 1, 1990, that authorizes it to obtain or maintain social security numbers. Therefore, we have no basis for concluding that these social security numbers are confidential under section 405(c)(2)(C)(viii)(I) of title 42 of the United States Code. We caution the sheriff, however, that section 552.352 of the Government Code imposes criminal penalties for the release of confidential information. Prior to releasing these social security numbers, the sheriff should ensure that they were not obtained and are not maintained by the sheriff pursuant to any provision of law enacted on or after October 1, 1990. We also note that the remaining submitted information contains some information that is excepted from disclosure pursuant to section 552.117(a)(2) of the Government Code. Section 552.117(a)(2) excepts from disclosure a peace officer's home address, home telephone number, personal pager number, social security number, and information indicating whether the peace officer has family members, regardless of whether the peace officer made an election under section 552.024 of the Government Code. See Gov't Code § 552.117(a)(2). Section 552.117(a)(2) applies to peace officers as defined by article 2.12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, we conclude that the sheriff must withhold the information that we have marked pursuant to section 552.117(a)(2) of the Government Code. Finally, we note that portions of the remaining submitted information are excepted from disclosure pursuant to section 552.130 of the Government Code. Section 552.130(a) excepts from disclosure information that relates to: "(1) a motor vehicle operator's or driver's license or permit issued by an agency of this state; (2) a motor vehicle title or registration issued by an agency of this state; or (3) a personal identification document issued by an agency of this state or a local agency authorized to issue an identification document." Gov't Code § 552.130(a)(1)-(3). Accordingly, we conclude that the sheriff must withhold the information that we have marked pursuant to section 552.130 of the Government Code. In summary, social security numbers contained within the submitted information may be confidential under federal law. The sheriff must withhold the information that we have marked pursuant to sections 552.117(a)(2) and 552.130 of the Government Code. The sheriff must release the remaining submitted information 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, Ronald J. Bounds
c: Mr. C. Hamilton Huckleberry
Mr. Carmine Petrillo
Footnotes 1. We note that the sheriff does not claim that any portion of the submitted information is excepted from disclosure under section 552.108 of the Government Code. 2. Discretionary exceptions are intended to protect only the interests of the governmental body, as distinct from exceptions which are intended to protect information deemed confidential by law or which implicates the interests of third parties. See, e.g., Open Records Decision Nos. 630 at 4 (1994) (governmental body may waive attorney-client privilege, section 552.107(1)), 551 (1990) (statutory predecessor to section 552.103 serves only to protect governmental body's position in litigation and does not itself make information confidential), 522 at 4 (1989) (discretionary exceptions in general), 473 (1987) (governmental body may waive statutory predecessor to section 552.111); see also Dallas Area Rapid Transit v. Dallas Morning News, 4 S.W.3d 469, 475-76 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1999, no pet.) (governmental body may waive section 552.103). Discretionary exceptions, therefore, do not constitute "other law" that makes information confidential. 3. 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). 4. Section 552.101 of the Government Code excepts from disclosure information considered to be confidential by law, either constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision. See Gov't Code § 552.101. Section 552.101 encompasses information that is protected from disclosure by other statutes. POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB:WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US |