June 6, 2008

Mr. David P. Backus

Underwood, Wilson, Berry, Stein, & Johnson

P.O. Box 16197

Lubbock, Texas 79490

OR2008-07741

Dear Mr. Backus:

You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under the Public Information Act (the "Act"), chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 312118.

The Crosbyton Independent School District (the "district"), which you represent, received a request from an investigator with the Texas Education Agency (the "TEA") for six categories of information pertaining to a specified former district principal. You state that some of the requested information has been provided to the requestor. You claim that the submitted information is excepted from disclosure under section 552.101 of the Government Code. We have considered the exception 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." Gov't Code § 552.101. This exception encompasses information that other statutes make confidential. The district raises section 552.101 in conjunction with section 21.355 of the Education Code, which provides that "[a] document evaluating the performance of a teacher or administrator is confidential." Educ. Code § 21.355. This office has interpreted section 21.355 to apply to any document that evaluates, as that term is commonly understood, the performance of a teacher or an administrator. See Open Records Decision No. 643 (1996). We have determined that the word "administrator" in section 21.355 means a person who is required to and does in fact hold an administrator's certificate under chapter 21 of the Education Code and is performing the functions of an administrator, as that term is commonly defined, at the time of the evaluation. Id.

The submitted information consists of performance evaluations of a former district principal. You have provided documentation showing that the principal was a certified administrator and was serving as an administrator at the time of the submitted performance evaluations. Having considered your arguments and reviewed the information at issue, we agree that the submitted documents evaluate the performance of an administrator for purposes of section 21.355 of the Education Code.

We note that TEA's request states that it is seeking this information under the authority provided to the State Board for Educator Certification ("SBEC") by section 249.14 of title 19 of the Texas Administrative Code. ⁽¹⁾ Accordingly, we will consider whether section 249.14 of title 19 of the Texas Administrative Code permits TEA to obtain information that is otherwise confidential under section 21.355.

Chapter 249 of title 19 of the Texas Administrative Code governs disciplinary proceedings, sanctions, and contested cases involving SBEC. See 19 T.A.C. § 249.14. Section 249.14 provides in relevant part:

(a) Staff [of TEA] may obtain and investigate information concerning alleged improper conduct by an educator, applicant, examinee, or other person subject to this chapter that would warrant the board denying relief to or taking disciplinary action against the person or certificate.

. . .

(c) The executive director and staff may also obtain and act on other information providing grounds for investigation and possible action under this chapter.

19 T.A.C. § 249.14. We note that these regulations do not specifically grant access to information subject to section 21.355 of the Education Code. We further note that section 21.355 of the Education Code has its own access provision governing release of information. Generally, if confidentiality provisions or another statute specifically authorize release of information under certain circumstances or to particular entities, then the information may only be released or transferred in accordance therewith. See Attorney General Opinions GA-0055 (2003) at 3-4 (SBEC not entitled to access teacher appraisals made confidential by section 21.355 of the Education Code where section 21.352 of the Education Code expressly authorizes limited release of appraisals to other school districts in connection with teachers' employment applications), DM-353 (1995) at 4-5 n.6 (detailed provisions in state law for disclosure of records would not permit disclosure "to other governmental entities and officials . . . without violating the record's confidentiality"), JM-590 (1986) at 5 ("express mention or enumeration of one person, thing, consequence, or class is tantamount to an express exclusion of all others"); Open Records Decision No. 655 (1997) (because statute permitted Department of Public Safety to transfer confidential criminal history information only to certain entities for certain purposes, county could not obtain information from the department regarding applicants for county employment). We also note that an interagency transfer of this information is not permissible where, as here, the applicable statute enumerates the specific entities to which information encompassed by the statute may be disclosed, and the enumerated entities do not include the requesting governmental body. See Open Records Decision Nos. 655 at 8-9 (1997), 516 at 4-5 (1989), 490 at 2 (1988); see also Attorney General Opinion GA-0055. Accordingly, because section 21.355 of the Education Code specifically permits release of information to certain enumerated entities and in certain circumstances that do not include TEA's request in this instance, we therefore conclude that, notwithstanding the provisions of section 249.14, the district must withhold the submitted information under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with section 21.355 of the Education Code.

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 file suit in Travis County within 30 calendar days. Id. § 552.324(b). In order to get the full benefit of such a challenge, 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 challenge 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,

Allan D. Meesey

Assistant Attorney General

Open Records Division

ADM/mcf

Ref: ID# 312118

Enc. Submitted documents

c: Mr. Michael Franks

Texas Education Agency

1701 North Congress Avenue

Austin, Texas 78701-1494

(w/o enclosures)

Footnotes

1. Chapter 21 of the Education Code authorizes SBEC to regulate and oversee all aspects of the certification, continuing education, and standards of conduct of public school educators. See Educ. Code § 21.031(a). Section 21.041 of the Education Code states that SBEC may "provide for disciplinary proceedings, including the suspension or revocation of an educator certificate, as provided by Chapter 2001, Government Code." Id. § 21.041(b)(7). Section 21.041 also authorizes SBEC to "adopt rules as necessary for its own procedures." Id. § 21.041(a).

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