173 A.3d 1143
Pa.2017Background
- Section 614 of the Administrative Code (71 P.S. § 234) requires Commonwealth agencies to transmit an annual employee "List" (name, position, DOB, county/voting residence, salary, hire date, service history) to certain State Officers and designates that information "public information" (except voting residence).
- Pennsylvanians for Union Reform (PFUR) demanded the List in manipulable electronic form and insisted only voting residence could be redacted. The State Treasurer treated the demand as a Right-to-Know Law (RTKL) request; PFUR rejected RTKL application.
- Commonwealth Court held Regulation 7.201 (promulgated in 1976 under earlier statutes) continued to provide access at the State Library without written request and thus RTKL procedures/exemptions did not apply.
- Treasurer, Governor’s Office of Administration (GOA) and unions appealed; this Court granted review and consolidated related appeals. The Court reconsidered whether Regulation 7.201 remains effective and whether RTKL governs access and exemptions for the Section 614 List.
- The Court held Regulation 7.201 lost statutory authority after the 2002 repeal of the pre-2002 RTKA access provision that had authorized it; therefore RTKL access procedures govern access to the List.
- The Court ruled RTKL exemption provisions (section 67.708) may not be used to convert statutorily "public information" under § 614 into non-public information, but the Treasurer must apply the constitutional PSEA informational-privacy balancing test before disclosure.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (PFUR) | Defendant's Argument (Treasurer/GOA/Unions) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Regulation 7.201 still authorizes public access to the §614 List outside RTKL | Regulation 7.201 controls; it provides access at State Library without written request, so RTKL does not apply | 7.201 relied on repealed statutory authority and is obsolete; RTKL access rules now govern | Regulation 7.201 lacks continuing statutory authority after repeal of its authorizing RTKA provision; RTKL access provisions govern access to the List |
| Whether RTKL exemptions (§67.708) permit redactions of information that §614 declares "public information" | RTKL exceptions apply; nothing in §614 precludes exemptions or modern privacy protections | Applying §67.708 to redact would modify §614’s express declaration that the List is public; RTKL §67.306 forbids altering a record’s public/nonpublic character established by statute | RTKL exemptions in §67.708 may not be used to convert statutorily public §614 information into non-public information (i.e., Treasurer may not rely on §67.708 to redact the List) |
| Whether constitutional informational-privacy concerns limit disclosure of §614 data | PFUR: public interest in identifying recipients of public funds outweighs privacy | Treasurer/GOA/Unions: PSEA requires balancing; modern threats justify protection of certain personal data | Regardless of §67.708, the Treasurer must perform the PSEA Article I, §1 balancing test before disclosing personal information on the List; constitutional privacy can constrain disclosure |
| Whether Treasury must deposit the List at the State Library for unrestricted citizen access | PFUR: yes — §614 (and Reg. 7.201) requires unredacted availability | Treasurer: no; access now governed by RTKL procedures, not State Library deposition | Treasurer has no obligation to make the List available at the State Library without following RTKL access procedures and constitutional balancing |
Key Cases Cited
- Pa. State Educ. Ass’n v. Commonwealth, Dep’t of Cmty. & Econ. Dev., 148 A.3d 142 (Pa. 2016) (constitutional informational-privacy right requires a balancing test before government disclosure of personal information)
- Bowling v. Office of Open Records, 76 A.3d 453 (Pa. 2013) (RTKL access provisions and standards of review)
- Pennsylvania Gaming Control Bd. v. Office of Open Records (Schneller), 103 A.3d 1276 (Pa. 2014) (RTKL does not automatically govern every request when another statute provides access procedures)
- Dept. of Labor & Industry v. Heltzel, 90 A.3d 823 (Pa. Commw. 2014) (distinguishing statutes that establish public nature of records from statutes that prescribe access; conflicts governed by RTKL §3101.1)
- Governor’s Office of Administration v. Purcell, 35 A.3d 811 (Pa. Commw. 2011) (certain personal data like month and day of birth may implicate personal security exception)