an agent for other governmeutalunits is seen mo&t clearlyin its purchasingoperations,but the statutoryprovision&for telecommunicationsservices support that idea, also. They specify
p. 2025 or. RosterA. Foerster- Page 4 (m-446)
that the comiaelon shall p:Lan,establishand manage the ayatero'for all state agencies." (Emphasis added). V.T.C.S. art. 6Or SlO.OZ(a). The comiasion is charged with maintaining 'records relatingto the consolidatedtelecommunicationsaystamas necessaryto enable the comniaaionto ar.alyze the coat effectfveneasof the system to state agencies.' (Ewplu~aia added). Id. 510.03(b). And it is Ksignated the agency of the state for obtainjng teleconmunicatio~ services. -Id. 810.08.
In performing its telecommunicationsresponsibilities.the coumiaaionis chargedwith ,Bduty to "fulfillthe telecommunications requirements of each stc.te agency. . . ." V.T.C.S. srt. 6Glb. §lO.Ol(b). The billing :tnformationit collects or maintains in accomplishingthis purpose shouldbe consideredrecordsof the agency served, rather than its OIRL,particularlyif 'the telecommunication: requirements'of the a measure of confidentiality for such information. Section 10.06(a) of article 601b requires the conmission to develop a system of billings and charges which 'allocates the total stat'scost to each entity serviced based on proportionateuse." but not divest billing informationof its characteras primarilyB record of the erkitybilled.
The questionhere is no'twhether a list of telephonecalls can be considered"public iofornuzion"under the Opan Records Act. If the list were the record of a departmentor agency coveredby the act, and if no exception allowed b3,the act applied, clearly it could be so considered. See Opan RecordsDecisionNo. 40 (1975). But here we are dealing withrecords of a (department to which the Open Records Act itself does not apply, and the act's specific exceptions(which are relevantonly if the act would otherwisemake the informatiocpublic) as well es the act's definxion of "public information,,are therefore not pertinent. Once It has been determinedthat records sought are records of the judiciary, the Cpen Records Act is no longer coc- trolling.
Of course,not every qency that interactswith the judiciaryis the agent of the judiciary. acting for it and on its behalf in collectlug,assembling.or alaintaining information. See Benavidea -- v. Lee, 665 S.W.2d 151 (Tex. .kpp.- San Antonio 1983. nF&it). Nor is zry agency that sometimrciacts as the agent of the judiciaryto be consideredas always doing s'o. C-are Open RecordsDecisionE'oa.411 (1984)and 398 (1983)s AttorneyGeneralOpinionJ'M-266(1964).
In the situationyou bave posed, however,we believe the State Purchasingand GeneralServicesConmrissionacts as agent for the Texas Supreme Court and that the release of such records is a matter of discretionfor the court, not for your agency. The Open Records Act does not apply.
p. 2026 Er. Eomer A. Foerster- Page 5 (JM-446)
SUMMARY
The releaseof telephonerecordsof the Suprema Court of Texas is a matter of discretionfor the court, not for the State Purchasingand General Services Comissi~on.which acts as the court's agent in collectjogsuch information.
JIM HATTOX Attorney Generalof Texas
JACK BIGBTOkXR First AssistantAttorneyGrneral
MARY KELLER ExecutiveAssistantAttorneyGeneral
ROBERT GRAY SpecialAssistantAttorneyGeneral
RICK GILPIN Chairman,OpinionComittec:
Preparedby Bruce Youogblocjd AssistantAttorneyGeneral
p. 2027