Office of the Budget v. Office of Open Records
11 A.3d 618
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2011Background
- Budget petitions for review of OOR Final Determination granting Senseman’s request for Tolbert Masonry payroll records from a project funded with RACP grants.
- OOR held payroll records were not in Budget’s possession but were within Budget’s custody/control due to auditing duties under the RACP contract.
- RACP grant agreements were deemed not contracts relating to government functions, so Section 506(d) did not apply to disclosure.
- OOR nonetheless concluded payrolls were public records under Section 901 because Budget could access/custody them, and thus must be disclosed.
- Court analyzed plain language of Sections 901 and 305, Lukes v. DPW, and DCNR to determine whether custody/control creates a public-record presumption.
- Court reversed OOR’s order, holding Section 901 does not create a custody/control public-record presumption and payrolls are not public records absent Section 506(d) applicability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does RTKL Section 901 create a public-record presumption for records merely in agency custody/control? | Senseman | Budget | No presumption; no disclosure under 901 absent possession. |
| Are Tolbert Masonry payroll records public records under Section 506(d) given no governmental-function contract? | Senseman | Budget | Not subject to 506(d); records not public records. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lukes v. Department of Public Welfare, 976 A.2d 609 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009) (disclosure requires custody/control factors under Prior Law)
- Department of Conservation and Natural Resources v. Office of Open Records, 1 A.3d 929 (Pa.Cmwlth.2010) (disclosure of certified payrolls depends on possession and redaction issues; not controlling here)
- Department of Transportation v. Office of Open Records, 7 A.3d 329 (Pa.Cmwlth.2010) (independent review of OOR; broad evidence consideration)