Click for home page

December 5, 2002

Mr. Brad Norton
Assistant City Attorney
City of Austin Law Department
P. O. Box 1088
Austin, Texas 78767-8845


Dear Mr. Norton:

You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 173172.

The City of Austin (the "city") received a request for copies of training records pertaining to a specified city police department ("department") officer in regard to a specified traffic accident. The requestor subsequently clarified that he was also seeking documents related to a report filed with regard to the accident, as well as audio and/or video produced by the officer at the accident scene. See Gov't Code 552.222 (providing that if request for information is unclear, governmental body may ask requestor to clarify request); see also Open Records Decision No. 31 (1974) (stating that when governmental bodies are presented with broad requests for information rather than for specific records, governmental body may advise requestor of types of information available so that request may be properly narrowed). You state that the city will release some responsive information to the requestor. You claim, however, that the remaining requested information is excepted from disclosure pursuant to section 552.101 of the Government Code. We have considered the exception you claim and have reviewed the submitted information.

Initially, we must address the procedural requirements of section 552.301 of the Government Code. Section 552.301 provides in pertinent part that a governmental body must ask the attorney general for a decision as to whether requested information must be disclosed not later than the tenth business day after the date of receiving the written request for information. See Gov't Code 552.301(b). We note, and you acknowledge, that the city did not request a decision from our office regarding the remaining requested information within ten business days of the city's receipt of the request for information. Consequently, we find that the city failed to comply with section 552.301 of the Government Code in requesting a decision from our office with respect to the remaining requested information. See Gov't Code 552.301(b).

Because the city failed to request a decision from us within ten business days of receiving the request, the information at issue is now presumed public. See Gov't Code 552.302; see also Hancock v. State Bd. of Ins., 797 S.W.2d 379 (Tex. App.--Austin 1990, no writ); City of Houston v. Houston Chronicle Publ'g Co., 673 S.W.2d 316, 323 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1984, no writ); Open Records Decision No. 319 (1982). The city must demonstrate a compelling interest in order to overcome this presumption of openness. See id. Normally, a governmental body demonstrates a compelling interest by showing that some other source of law makes the information confidential or that the release of the requested information implicates third party interests. See Open Records Decision No. 150 at 2 (1977). Since the city claims that the submitted information is excepted from disclosure pursuant to section 552.101 of the Government Code, we will consider that claim with respect to the submitted information.

You claim that the submitted information is excepted from disclosure pursuant to section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with section 143.089 of the Local Government Code.(1) Section 143.089 contemplates two different types of personnel files, one that the city is required to maintain as part of the department officer's civil service file, and one that the department may maintain for its own internal use. See Local Gov't Code 143.089(a), (g). The civil service file must contain certain specified items, including documents relating to any misconduct in those cases where the department took disciplinary action against the officer. See id. 143.089(a)(2). However, documents relating to any alleged misconduct or disciplinary action taken must be removed from the civil service file if the department determines that there is insufficient evidence to sustain the charge of misconduct or that the disciplinary action was taken without just cause. See id. 143.089(b), (c). Information that reasonably relates to an officer's employment relationship with the department and that is maintained in a department's internal file pursuant to section 143.089(g) is confidential and must not be released. See City of San Antonio v. San Antonio Express-News, 47 S.W.3d 556 (Tex. App.-- San Antonio 2000, pet. denied); City of San Antonio v. Texas Attorney General, 851 S.W.2d 946, 949 (Tex. App.--Austin 1993, writ denied). Thus, subsections (a)-(c) limit the contents of the civil service file.

Subsection (g) authorizes, but does not require, the department to maintain for its use a separate and independent, internal personnel file on an officer. Section 143.089(g) provides:

A fire or police department may maintain a personnel file on a fire fighter or police officer employed by the department for the department's use, but the department may not release any information contained in the department file to any agency or person requesting information relating to a fire fighter or police officer. The department shall refer to the director or the director's designee a person or agency that requests information that is maintained in the fire fighter's or police officer's personnel file.

Local Gov't Code 143.089(g). In City of San Antonio v. Texas Attorney General, 851 S.W.2d 946 (Tex. App.--Austin 1993, writ denied), the court addressed a request for information contained in a police officer's personnel file maintained by the department for its use and addressed the applicability of section 143.089(g) to that file. In that case, the records included in the personnel file related to complaints against the police officer for which no disciplinary action was taken. See id. The court determined that section 143.089(g) made these records confidential. See id at 949. You state that the information at issue is maintained within the departmental personnel file maintained by the department. We, therefore, agree that the information is confidential pursuant to section 143.089(g) of the Local Government Code and, thus, must be withheld from disclosure pursuant to section 552.101 of the Government 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 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 Department of Public 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.


Ronald J. Bounds
Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Division


Ref: ID# 173172

Enc. Submitted documents

cc: Mr. Mike Heintzelman
1004 Timmons Drive
Copperas Cove, Texas 76522
(w/o enclosures)



1. 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
An Equal Employment Opportunity Employer

Home | ORLs