November 27, 2007

Ms. Sandra Griffin
Perdue, Brandon, Fielder, Collins & Mott, L.L.P.
3301 Northland Drive, Suite 505
Austin, Texas 78731

OR2007-15515

Dear Ms. Griffin:

You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code, the Public Information Act (the "Act"). Your request was assigned ID# 296390.

The Smith County Appraisal District (the "district"), which you represent, received requests for 1) any sales data with confirmed prices from sales of commercial property since January 1, 2006, 2) all data contained in the commercial comparable sales database, and 3) the 2006 and 2007 commercial ratio studies and their supporting data. The district claims the requested information is excepted from disclosure under sections 552.101 and 552.148 of the Government Code. We have considered the district's claimed exceptions and reviewed the submitted representative sample of information. ⁽¹⁾

First, the district explains the requested information was previously ruled upon by this office in Open Records Letter No. 2006-07333 (2006) and that the ruling should be relied on as a previous determination. In Open Records Letter No. 2006-07333, the request was for the 2006 ratio studies performed or received by the district. The information at issue in this request is for the 2006 and 2007 commercial ratio studies and their supporting data. Thus, the prior decision only addressed a portion of the information at issue here. Because it does not appear that the laws, facts, and circumstances have changed since the district's receipt of the prior decision, the district must continue to rely on Open Records Letter No. 2006-07333 for information subject to that decision. See Open Records Decision No. 673 (2001) (so long as law, facts, and circumstances on which prior ruling was based have not changed, first type of previous determination exists where requested information is precisely same information as was addressed in a prior attorney general ruling, ruling is addressed to same governmental body, and ruling concludes that information is or is not excepted from disclosure). We will address the district's arguments under section 552.148 for the remaining information.

Section 552.148 of the Government Code provides:

(a) Information relating to real property sales prices, descriptions, characteristics, and other related information received from a private entity by the comptroller or the chief appraiser of an appraisal district under Chapter 6, Tax Code, is excepted from the requirements of Section 552.021.

(b) . . ., the property owner or agent may, on request, obtain from the chief appraiser comparable sales data from a reasonable number of sales . . .. Information obtained under this subsection:

(1) remains confidential in the possession of the property owner or agent; and

(2) may not be disclosed or used for any purpose except as evidence or argument at the hearing on the protest.

(c) . . ., the property owner . . . may, on request, obtain from the comptroller any information, including confidential information, obtained by the comptroller in connection with the comptroller's finding that is being protested. Confidential information obtained by a property owner, . . . under this subsection:

(1) remains confidential in the possession of the owner, district or agent; and

(2) may not be disclosed to a person who is not authorized to receive or inspect the information.

See Act of May 21, 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., ch. 471, § 1, 2007 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 832 (to be codified at Gov't Code § 552.148). The legislative history of section 552.148 indicates it was enacted as a result of the issuance of several open records rulings of this office in which we ruled that information provided by Multiple Listing Services ("MLS") to appraisal districts under confidentiality agreements is subject to required public disclosure under the Act. House Comm. On State Affairs, Bill Analysis, Tex. Comm. Substitute H.B. 2188, 80th Leg., R.S. (2007); see, e.g., Open Records Letter Nos. 2006-07161 (2006), 2006-04628 (2006). Because of these rulings, many multiple listing services stopped providing sales information to appraisal districts. The bill analysis of House Bill 2188 states that the purpose of section 552.148 is to allow the relationships between a multiple listing service and appraisal districts to continue. House Comm. On State Affairs, Bill Analysis, Tex. Comm. Substitute H.B. 2188, 80th Leg., R.S. (2007). Here, the district states the requested information relates to real property sales prices, descriptions, and characteristics obtained from private entities. The district does not inform us, nor does it appear, that the district is authorized to release this information to the requestor. See Gov't Code § 552.148(b) (providing property owner or owner's agent access to certain sales data for specified purpose). Based on the district's representations, we conclude to the extent the information was obtained from a multiple listing service or other similar entity, the information is confidential under section 552.148. To the extent the information was not obtained from such an entity, the information is not confidential under section 552.148 of the Government Code and must be released.

Lastly, the district asks whether section 552.148 makes the information confidential or whether the district has the discretion to release the information. We conclude that based on the plain language of the statute and when read as a whole, section 552.148 makes the information confidential and the district may not voluntarily release the information except as provided by section 552.148(b).

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, upon receiving this ruling, the governmental body will either release the public records promptly pursuant to section 552.221(a) of the Government Code or file a lawsuit challenging this ruling pursuant to section 552.324 of the Government Code. If the governmental body fails to do one of these things, 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 Office of the Attorney General 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,

Yen-Ha Le

Assistant Attorney General

Open Records Division

YHL/sdk

Ref: ID# 296387

Enc: Submitted documents

c: Ms. Abbigail Pendergraft

Patrick O'Connor & Associates, L.P.

2200 North Loop West, Suite 200

Houston, Texas 77018

(w/o enclosures)

Footnotes

1. We assume that the "representative sample" of records submitted to this office is truly representative of the requested records as a whole. See Open Records Decision Nos. 499 (1988), 497 (1988). This open records letter does not reach, and therefore does not authorize the withholding of, any other requested records to the extent that those records contain substantially different types of information than that submitted to this office.

POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB: WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US
An Equal Employment Opportunity Employer