Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                               ATTORNEY            GENERAL OF TEXAS
    GREG       ABBOTT
    October 14,2005
    The Honorable Mike Stafford                             Opinion No. GA-0367
    Harris County Attorney
    10 19 Congress, 15 th Floor                             Re: Whether Harris County Animal Control must
    Houston, Texas 77002                                    provide to a private corporation that contracts
    with the City of Houston information made
    confidential under chapter 826 of the Health and
    Safety Code (RQ-033%GA)
    Dear Mr. Stafford:
    You ask whether Harris County Animal Control (“HCAC”) must provide to a private
    corporation that contracts with the City of Houston (the “City”) information made confidential under
    chapter 826 of the Health and Safety Code.’
    I.      Backwound
    The Rabies Control Act of 198 1, chapter 826 of the Health and Safety Code, provides that
    the Texas Board of Health2, “or its designee, with the cooperation of the governing bodies of
    counties and municipalities, shall administer the rabies control program established by this chapter.”
    TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. 9 826.01 l(a) (Vernon 2003). Chapter 826 “and the rules
    adopted by the [State Board of Health] under this chapter are the minimum standards for rabies
    control.” 
    Id. Ij 826.012.
    “The governing body of a municipality or the commissioners court of
    a county may adopt this chapter and the standards adopted by the board.” 
    Id. fj 826.013.
    A
    commissioners court “may adopt ordinances or rules that establish a local rabies control program in
    the county and set local standards that are compatible with and equal to or more stringent than the
    program established by this chapter and the rules adopted by the board.” 
    Id. 5 826.014(a).
    Ordinances or rules adopted by a commissioners court “supersede this chapter and the rules of the
    board within that county so that dual enforcement will not occur.” 
    Id. 8 826.014(b).
    Like a county,
    a municipality may, by ordinance or rule, establish a local rabies control program “and set local
    standards that are compatible with and equal to or more stringent than: (1) the ordinances or rules
    ‘See Letter from Marva Gay, Assistant County Attorney, Harris County, to Honorable Greg Abbott, Texas
    Attorney General (Apr. 11,2005) ( on f11e with Opinion Committee, also available at http://www.oag.state.tx.us).
    2Now a part of the Health & Human Services Commission (see Act of June 2,2003, 78th Leg., R.S., ch. 198,
    H.B. 2292, $6 1 .Ol-.09, 2003 Tex. Gen. Laws 611); we refer herein to the former designation.
    The Honorable Mike Stafford      - Page 2         (GA-0367)
    adopted by the county in which the municipality is located; and (2) the program established by this
    chapter and the rules adopted by the board.” 
    Id. 8 826015(a).
         Ordinances or rules adopted by a
    governing body of a municipality “supersede ordinances or rules adopted by the county in which the
    municipality is located, this chapter, and the rules of the board within that municipality so that
    multiple enforcement will not occur.” 
    Id. § 826.0
    15(b). Thus, a municipality’s ordinances and rules
    with regard to rabies control supersede chapter 826, Board of Health rules, and county ordinances
    and rules, provided that the municipality’s ordinances and rules are at least as stringent as, inter alia,
    chapter 826 of the Health and Safety Code and the county ordinances and rules.
    Section 826.031 of the Health and Safety Code authorizes “[t)he governing body of a
    municipality . . . [to] adopt ordinances or rules under Section . . . 826.015 requiring the registration
    of each dog and cat within the jurisdiction of the municipality . . . .” 
    Id. 5 826.03
    1(a). In addition,
    66[t]he enforcing agency may collect a fee set by ordinance for the registration of each dog or cat and
    may retain the fees collected.” 
    Id. 5 826.03
    l(c). Section 826.021 provides:
    (a) Except as otherwise provided by board rule, the owner of
    a dog or cat shall have the animal vaccinated against rabies by the
    time the animal is four months of age and at regular intervals
    thereafter as prescribed by board rule.
    (b) A veterinarian who vaccinates a dog or cat against rabies
    shall issue to the animal’s owner a vaccination certificate in a form
    that meets the minimum standards approved by the board.
    (4 A county or municipality may not register or license an
    animal that has not been vaccinated in accordance with this section.
    
    Id. 5 826.021
    (emphasis added).
    Pursuant to its authority under chapter 826, the City by ordinance requires, with certain
    exceptions, that “[n]o person shall own, keep, possess, or have control over any dog or cat within
    the city unless such person has a current city license for such dog or cat.” HOUSTON, TEX.,
    ORDINANCES,art. IV, Div. 1, 9 6-86(a) (1985). The ordinance states that “[a] person may obtain
    a license for a cat or a dog . . . by completing the appropriate application therefor, paying the
    prescribed license fee, and furnishing proof of vaccination against rabies.” 
    Id. 5 6-86(c).
    Another
    provision declares that “[n]o animal license shall be issued unless there is exhibited to the licensing
    authority a certificate by a veterinarian showing that the animal to be licensed has been inoculated
    with a rabies vaccine approved by the U. S. Department of Agriculture’s Veterinary Biologics
    Division in accordance with the recommendations of the manufacturer, and that such vaccination
    will not expire prior to the issuance of the license.” 
    Id. 5 6-9
    1.
    You indicate that HCAC “has received a letter from PetData, Inc. (‘PetData’), which
    apparently has a contract with the City of Houston Bureau of Animal Regulation and Care . . . to
    collect animal licensing fees. PetData is requesting that [HCAC] periodically submit to PetData a
    The Honorable Mike Stafford         - Page 3           (GA-0367)
    record of each rabies vaccination administered to dogs and cats owned by residents of the City of
    Houston, including the owner’s name, address, and phone number.“3 You contend that HCAC is
    prohibited from releasing such information to PetData by section 826.02 11 of the Health and Safety
    Code, which provides the following:
    (a) Information contained in a rabies vaccination certificate
    or in any record compiled from the information contained in one
    or more certificates that identifies or tends to identify an owner or
    an address, telephone number, or other personally identifying
    information of an owner of a vaccinated animal is confidential and
    not subject to disclosure under Chapter 552, Government Code [the
    Public Information Act] .4
    (b) The information may be disclosed only to agovernmental
    entity for purposes related to the protection of public health and
    safety. A governmental entity that receives the information, including
    a county or municipality that registers dogs and cats under Subchapter
    D, must maintain the confidentiality of the information, may not
    disclose the information under Chapter 552, Government Code, and
    may not use the information for a purpose that does not directly
    relate to the protection ofpublic health and safety.
    (c) A person commits an offense if the person distributes
    information that is confidential under this section. An offense under
    this subsection is a misdemeanor punishable by:
    (1) a fine of not more than $1,000;
    (2) confinement      in the county jail for not more than 180
    days; or
    (3) both the fine and confinement.
    Act of May 25200579th    Leg., R.S., ch. 1235, $ 1,2005 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 3993,2993                          (to be
    codified as amended TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. 5 826.0211) (emphasis added).
    3See Brief from Marva Gay, Assistant County Attorney, Harris County, to Honorable        Greg Abbott, Texas
    Attorney General, at 1 (April 11, 2005) (on file with Opinion Committee) [hereinafter Brief].
    (a) was the only provision in section 826.02 11 that was amended in the Seventy-ninth   Legislative
    Session.
    The Honorable Mike Stafford         - Page 4         (GA-0367)
    In your view, PetData is not a governmental entity under subsection (b) of section 826.02 11.
    Nor, you contend, is PetData collecting the information for purposes “relate[d] to the protection of
    public health and safety;” rather, you state that “PetData appears to operate solely as a collection
    agent for the City. PetData is seeking confidential owner information to generate revenue for the
    City of Houston by collecting a license fee from owners of already-vaccinated          dogs and cats.
    Collecting and generating revenue is a purpose that may not ‘directly relate to the protection of
    public health and safety’ as is required by sections 826.0211 (b) and 826.03 1 l(b) of the Health and
    Safety Code.” See Brief, supra note 2, at 4.
    II.     Analysis
    As we have noted, municipal ordinances or rules regarding a rabies control program
    supersede both ordinances and rules adopted by a county and rules promulgated by the State Board
    of Health, provided that such ordinances and rules are at least as stringent as the standards set
    forth in chapter 826 of the Health and Safety Code. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN.
    $ 826.015(b) (V emon 2003). One of the provisions found in chapter 826 is the prohibition against
    disclosure of information contained in a rabies vaccination certificate to anyone other than a
    “governmental entity.” See 
    id. 5 826.0211
    (b). You argue that, even if HCAC is required to disclose
    the information contained in a rabies vaccination certificate to the City itself, it need not disclose that
    information to PetData, which, as a private corporation and mere agent of the city, is not a
    “governmental entity.” Moreover, you contend, such disclosure to PetData is prohibited by section
    826.0211 (b) of the Health and Safety Code, and that statute prescribes criminal penalties for its
    violations. See Brief, supra note 2, at 3-4.
    The term “governmental entity” is not defined in chapter 826 of the Health and Safety Code.
    The term is, however, defined in numerous other Texas statutes. See, e.g., TEX. FAM. CODE ANN.
    8 101.014 (Vernon 2002) (“‘governmental entity’ means the state, a political subdivision of the
    state, or an agency of the state”); TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. 5 572.056(c) (Vernon 2004)
    (“‘governmental entity’ means the state, a political subdivision of the state, or a governmental entity
    created under the Texas Constitution or a statute of this state”); 
    id. 8 2058.00
    1(c) (Vernon 2000)
    (“‘governmental    entity’ means the state or an agency or political subdivision of the state”);
    TEX. LAB. CODE ANN. § 91.001(9) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05) (“‘governmental                entity’ means this
    state, or an agency, county, or municipality of this state”); TEX. TRANSP. CODE ANN. 5 441 .001(4)
    (Vernon 1999) (“‘governmental entity’ means a municipality, a county, or the department [of
    Transportation]“).   We have found no instance in which the term “governmental entity” has been
    defined to include a private company. Thus, we agree that PetData is not a “governmental entity”
    as that term is used in section 826.01 l(b) of the Health and Safety Code.
    It has been suggested,5 however, that the following provision authorizes the county to
    disclose to PetData, as an agent for the City, the information contained in a rabies vaccination
    certificate and made confidential by section 826.0211 of the Health and Safety Code. Section
    826.016 of the Health and Safety Code provides:
    ‘See Brief fromChristopher A. Richey, President, PetData, to Honorable Greg Abbott, Texas Attorney General,
    at 6 (May 26,2005) (on file with Opinion Committee).
    The Honorable Mike Stafford      - Page 5         (GA-0367)
    The governing body of a municipality and the commissioners court
    of a county may enter into contracts or agreements with public or
    private entities to carry out the activities required or authorized under
    this chapter.
    TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. 5 826.016 (Vernon 2003).                This provision is an affirmative
    grant to local governments to enter into contracts “to carry out the activities required or authorized
    under this chapter.” 
    Id. One of
    the activities authorized by chapter 826 is the registration and
    licensing of animals. See 
    id. 5 826.03
    l(a) (governing body of a municipality may adopt ordinances
    or rules requiring the registration of dogs and cats). Section 826.0 16 does not, in our view, furnish
    the authority to ignore a specific prohibition of chapter 826, i.e., that information contained in a
    rabies vaccination certificate that identifies or tends to identify a pet owner may be disclosed only
    to another “governmental entity.”
    We conclude that, because PetData is not a “governmental entity,” Harris County Animal
    Control is prohibited from disclosing to PetData any “information contained in a rabies vaccination
    certificate or in any record compiled from the information contained in one or more certificates that
    identifies or tends to identify an owner or an address, telephone number, or other personally
    identifying information of an owner of a vaccinated animal.” 
    Id. § 826.0
    211 (a)!
    6See supra note 3.
    The Honorable Mike Stafford    - Page 6         (GA-0367)
    SUMMARY
    Because PetData is not a “governmental          entity,” Harris
    County Animal Control is prohibited from disclosing to PetData
    any “[i]nformation contained in a rabies vaccination certificate or in
    any record compiled from the information            contained in one
    or more certificates that identifies or tends to identify an owner or
    an address, telephone number, or other personally identifying
    information of an owner of a vaccinated animal is confidential and
    not subject to disclosure under Chapter 552, Government Code.”
    BARRY R. MCBEE
    First Assistant Attorney General
    NANCY S. FULLER
    Chair, Opinion Committee
    Rick Gilpin
    Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee
    

Document Info

Docket Number: GA-0367

Judges: Greg Abbott

Filed Date: 7/2/2005

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017