Allegheny County Department of Administrative Services v. A Second Chance, Inc.
13 A.3d 1025
Pa. Commw. Ct.2011Background
- Parsons (WTAE-TV) sought RTKL access to ASCI employee payroll data, including names, birth dates, and hire dates, tied to County contracts.
- County initially provided payroll for two contractors, denied ASCI data, claiming ASCI records were not in County possession.
- Parsons appealed, County denied remaining ASCI data under Section 705 RTKL, arguing records not in County possession and not created by the County.
- Open Records ordered the County to obtain ASCI employee data from ASCI and provide to Parsons; ASCI sought intervention in trial court.
- Trial court ordered the County to obtain names, birth dates, and hire dates of all ASCI employees providing services to the County under the ASCI contract.
- Court held ASCI performs a governmental function; the data may be a public record if it directly relates to that function and is not exempt.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ASCI employee data are RTKL records | Parsons argues data are public records under RTKL; the contract and function make them records. | County/ASCI contend data are not records of the County and not directly related via 506(d)(1). | Data may be RTKL records under 506(d)(1); remanded for direct relation inquiry. |
| Whether 506(d)(1) permits access to records of a private contractor | Records in contractor possession that directly relate to a governmental function should be public. | 506(d)(1) should not expand access to non-public records; contractor records may be private. | 506(d)(1) applies; records in contractor possession can be public if directly related to the governmental function and not exempt. |
| Whether the information directly relates to ASCI's performance of its contractual obligations | Names, birth dates, and hire dates directly relate to ASCI’s contract performance. | Record precludes direct relation absent contract specifics and proper evidentiary record. | Remanded for evidence on whether data directly relate to contractual obligations. |
| Whether DPW Bulletins 3170-09-01/02 exempt the data from disclosure | Bulletins do not create exemptions; data not exempt by them. | Bulletins regulate documentation; could imply confidentiality. | Bulletins are nullity/regulatory and do not support exemption; not controlling here. |
| Whether the personal security exemption 708(b)(1)(ii) applies | ASCI may show risk to employees if data disclosed; exemption could apply. | No evidentiary record showing substantial risk. | Court may remand; opportunity to develop record on exemption applicability. |
Key Cases Cited
- East Stroudsburg Univ. Found. v. Office of Open Records, 995 A.2d 496 (Pa.Cmwlth.2010) (limits access to contractor records that directly relate to governmental function)
- Buehl v. Office of Open Records, 6 A.3d 27 (Pa.Cmwlth.2010) (records must directly relate to the governmental function; costs/premise records may be outside contract scope)
- Snyderman v. Pennsylvania Liquor Control Bd., 682 A.2d 1322 (Pa.Cmwlth.1996) (intervention is discretionary; limited to proper procedural posture)
- Signature Information Solutions v. Aston Township, 995 A.2d 510 (Pa.Cmwlth.2010) (waiver issue; agency may not introduce new grounds on appeal after denial)
- In re Silberstein, 11 A.3d 629 (Pa.Cmwlth.2011) (emails/personal documents not public records unless authorized by the agency)