• John Braden •
• Originally published January 15, 2009 at 10:52 a.m., updated January 15, 2009 at 10:52 a.m.

In response to the Attorney General of Texas’ ruling that Bay City officials had to release certain documentation that was requested through legal open records requests, the officials have decided to sue the state. On Friday, Nov. 21, the City of Bay City sent a 22-page report to the Attorney General of Texas’ office as a claim for declaratory judgment, meaning they disagree with the State’s previous ruling and are seeking different results. In late June and again on Aug. 22, a private citizen, with the assistance of various organizations, submitted open records requests to the City of Bay City for copies of credit card bills and receipts for certain city employees. Knapik hired attorney Katherine Mize from Houston and told both the people involved in the requests and the Matagorda Advocate that all correspondence had to go through Mize. She has, however, been unavailable for comment, although she did send a complete copy of the suit to the Advocate on Tuesday. Two weeks after receiving the second request for the documents, a letter was sent from Mize to the Office of the Attorney General in Austin in an attempt to explain why the documents were not being given out. According to the letter, “The City expects to be a plaintiff in litigation relating to the unlawful disclosure of credit card information in violation of applicable law. If the city were to disclose the information at this point, those responsible for the unlawful disclosure may contend that the copies in their possession were obtained solely as a result of the open records process.” As of Tuesday that week, the city has not filed an official complaint with the district attorney’s office regarding the illegal release of any documentation, according to DA Steven Reis. In a letter the State sent Mize on Sept. 11, the City was told that they had ten days from the receipt of the open records request to submit information to the attorney generals office and ask for their decision. When the state didn’t receive the information requested, they sent another letter to Mize dated Nov. 10, in which the attorney general’s office stated their stance. It was this stance, which the city disagreed with, that led to the City of Bay City versus the Attorney General of Texas lawsuit. According to the last letter, “…because the city has not complied with section 552.301 [of the government code] in requesting this decision, the requested information is presumed to be public. The city has waived its claim … and may not withhold any of the requested information on that basis.” However, attached as an exhibit with the lawsuit documentation, is an E-mail sent from Mize to the AG’s office on Sept. 29, 18 days after being notified of the 10-day deadline. The email claims that with Ike’s impact on the Houston area, the law firm at which Mize works was without power for an extended time and the workers were therefore out of the office. Mize received no word back from the AG’s office until the notice on Nov. 10. It was this, according to the petition, that led the city officials to believe they were in good standing. After receiving the notice that stated they had not done what was asked and had therefore waved their claim, the City of Bay City filed the suit against the State.

• Print
• •
• Share
  • Share this item

    Send this to a friend

    Share on FaceBook

  • Grab the link

    Copy and paste the link:

  • Blog about it

    Blog about this page.

  • Close
• •
• Post a Comment
• •
• Favorite
• •
• Report error
  • Thank you for your submission.
    Error report or correction

    Contact name (optional) Contact phone/e-mail (optional)  

    
  • Close
• •