LIVE! Daily | The District Fraternity Office

Joe, may we not forget the County Attorney's office tomfoolery as well. You know, like when Leland Lacy refused to pursue charges on a case he had never even reviewed the evidence in?  How do you use prosecutorial discretion if you have no facts to base your decision off of? Wouldn't you need to wait to make that call until you have reviewed the evidence? Especially if you knew that there was an I.T. changeover that prevented tons of information from reaching your desk in a timely form? I do believe a certain file exists somewhere proving a decision was made prior to the evidence coming in. Never getting my vote Leland. Let us not forget the City Attorney's office either... On Nov. 3rd, I requested police Policy and Procedure from S.A.P.D. records department. The P&P was released to me on Feb. 22nd.  The process should have been pretty simple because these document's, although voluminous, have been released before, which means with no new concerns raised by the City Attorney, they needed not request an opinion from the A.G. again by law, unless that opinion request, as stated, had to do with concerns over new laws and updates, which the City Attorney's office did not include.  In my discussion's with said office, they told me, they do this kind of stuff all the time, they change laws and have to redact them because they update so often... well if that was the case... why didn't ya'll tell the A.G. that in your letter to them in the first place? Making no sense whatsoever.  What took 65+ business days to redact in that P&P that you needed to keep from the A.G. and the citizen? Bringing new life to the term, "the process is the punishment".

Here's the A.G.'s response to the City Attorney's office regarding the matter we personally inquired about. Found it freely on the website... with a little digging. Oh yeah, they also told me if I was unhappy with the A.G.'s decision that I could appeal to his office... LOL! A little projection perhaps? Anyone who wants to know about the Public Information Act, I highly recommend looking up "Public Information Act Training Video", on You Tube. Put out by the Texas Attorney General.

Post Office Box 12548, Austin, Texas 78711-2548 • (512) 463-2100 • www.texasattorneygeneral.gov
February 13, 2023
Ms. Holly Voth
Assistant City Attorney
City of San Angelo
72 West College Avenue
San Angelo, Texas 76903
OR2023-05270
Dear Ms. Voth:
You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under the
Public Information Act (the “Act”), chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request
was assigned ID# 999716 (City File No. P004725-110322).
The City of San Angelo (the “city”) received a request for the policy and procedures of the
city’s police department (the “department”). You claim portions of the submitted
information are excepted from disclosure under section 552.108 of the Government Code.
We have considered the exception you claim and reviewed the submitted information.
We note the information you have marked was the subject of a previous request for
information, as a result of which this office issued Open Records Letter No. 2020-14707
(2020). In that ruling, we determined the department may withhold certain information
under section 552.108(b)(1) of the Government Code and must release the remaining
information. We have no indication the law, facts, or circumstances on which Open
Records Letter No. 2020-14707 was based have changed. Accordingly, the city must
continue to rely on Open Records Letter No. 2020-14707 as a previous determination and
withhold or release the identical information in accordance with that ruling.1 See Open
Records Decision No. 673 (2001) (so long as law, facts, and circumstances on which prior
ruling was based have not changed, first type of previous determination exists where
requested information is precisely same information as was addressed in prior attorney
general ruling, ruling is addressed to same governmental body, and ruling concludes that
information is or is not excepted from disclosure). As you raise no further exceptions to
disclosure, the city must release the remaining information.
1 As our ruling is dispositive, we need not address your argument against disclosure of this information.Ms. Holly Voth - Page 2
This letter ruling is limited to the particular information 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 information or any other circumstances.
This ruling triggers important deadlines regarding the rights and responsibilities of the
governmental body and of the requestor. For more information concerning those rights and
responsibilities, please visit our website at https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/open-
government/members-public/what-expect-after-ruling-issued or call the OAG’s Open
Government Hotline, toll free, at (877) 673-6839. Questions concerning the allowable
charges for providing public information under the Public Information Act may be directed
to the Cost Rules Administrator of the OAG, toll free, at (888) 672-6787.
Sincerely,
Tim Neal
Assistant Attorney General
Open Records Division
TN/eb
Ref: ID# 999716
Enc. Submitted documents
c: Requestor
(w/o enclosures)