February 12, 2004

Ms. Lillian Guillen Graham
Assistant City Attorney
City of Mesquite
P.O. Box 850137
Mesquite, Texas 75185-0137

OR2004-1065

Dear Ms. Graham:

You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 196110.

The Mesquite Police Department (the "department") received a request for a call sheet relating to a specified incident. You claim that the marked portions of the submitted information are excepted from disclosure under sections 552.101 and 552.130 of the Government Code. We have considered the exceptions you claim and reviewed the submitted information.

Section 552.101 of the Government Code excepts from disclosure "information considered to be confidential by law, either constitutional, statutory, or by judicial decision," and encompasses information made confidential by other statutes. You assert that the marked address and telephone number are confidential under section 772.118 of the Health and Safety Code. Chapter 772 of the Health and Safety Code authorizes the development of local emergency communications districts. Section 772.118 applies only to an emergency 911 district established in accordance with chapter 772. See Open Records Decision No. 649 (1996). This section makes the originating telephone numbers and addresses of 911 callers that are furnished by a service supplier confidential. Id. at 2. Section 772.118 applies to an emergency communication district for a county with a population of more than two million. You indicate that the department is part of an emergency communication district established under section 772.118. Therefore, the department must withhold the originating telephone number and address of a 911 caller furnished by a service supplier under section 552.101 in conjunction with section 772.118 of the Health and Safety Code.

You assert that the marked financial information is protected under the doctrine of common-law privacy.⁽¹⁾ Common-law privacy protects information if (1) the information contains highly intimate or embarrassing facts the publication of which would be highly objectionable to a reasonable person, and (2) the information is not of legitimate concern to the public. Industrial Found. v. Texas Indus. Accident Bd., 540 S.W.2d 668, 685 (Tex. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 931 (1977). This office has found that information that reflects an individual's personal financial decisions and is not related to a financial transaction between the individual and a governmental body is generally excepted from disclosure under common-law privacy. Open Records Decision Nos. 600 (1992) (public employee's withholding allowance certificate, designation of beneficiary of employee's retirement benefits, direct deposit authorization, and employee's decisions regarding voluntary benefits programs, among others, protected under common-law privacy), 545 (1990) (deferred compensation information, mortgage payments, assets, bills, and credit history protected under common-law privacy). This office has also ruled, however, that the public has a legitimate interest in the essential facts about a financial transaction between an individual and a governmental body. See Open Records Decision No. 600 (1992) (information revealing that employee participates in group insurance plan funded partly or wholly by governmental body is not excepted from disclosure). We find that the marked personal financial information is excepted from disclosure under section 552.101 in conjunction with common-law privacy.

You assert that the marked motor vehicle information included is excepted from disclosure under section 552.130 of the Government Code. Section 552.130 prohibits the release of information that relates to a motor vehicle operator's or driver's license or permit issued by an agency of this state, a personal identification document issued by an agency of this state, or a motor vehicle title or registration issued by an agency of this state. See Gov't Code § 552.130. Therefore, the marked Texas motor vehicle information must be withheld under section 552.130.

In summary, the department must withhold the marked telephone number and address under section 552.101 in conjunction with section 772.118 of the Health and Safety Code. The department msut withhold the marked personal financial information under section 552.101 in conjunction with common-law privacy. The department must withhold the marked Texas motor vehicle information under section 552.130. The department must release the remaining 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,

Amy D. Peterson
Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Division
ADP/sdk
Ref: ID# 196110
Enc. Submitted documents

c: Ms. Amanda Gafford
State Farm Insurance
P.O. Box 799011
Dallas, Texas 75379
(w/o enclosures)

Footnotes

1. Section 552.101 also encompasses the doctrine of common-law privacy.