Jennifer PeeblesTexas Watchdog5535 Memorial DriveSuite F, #601Houston, TX 77007March 16, 2009The Honorable Greg AbbottAttorney General of TexasOpen Records DivisionP.O. Box 12548Austin, Texas 78711-2548Dear Gen. Abbott:Your office has been asked to determine whether the City of Houston can withhold certain records Ihave requested under the Texas Public Information Act. I am writing you today to argue that the cityshould not be allowed to withhold that information.Specifically, I am writing you in reference to the Feb. 11, 2009, and Feb. 18, 2009, letters that your officehas received from Ms. Candice de la Garza, an assistant city attorney in Houston.In its letter, the city argues that certain entries on Mayor Bill White's calendar should be withheldbecause they "relate to the mayor's private social affairs and do not relate to any official City business." Idisagree in the strongest of terms.The mayor of any town's social affairs are the business of that town, whether the mayor wishes them tobe or not. Who the mayor has lunch with, goes to dinner with, attends church with or tailgates with atthe football game would be clearly identify people who may have influence on the city's public affairs.Being mayor is not a job where one can punch a timeclock at the end of the day and suddenly stop beingmayor until 8 a.m. the next morning. All the mayor's business is official city business.The city further argues that it should be allowed to withhold certain private correspondence andcommunications we have sought regarding a particular real estate development project here inHouston. The city argues that release of such information would constitute an invasion of privacy.News accounts here in Houston have raised questions about the relationship between the mayor's officeand the development in question. The public has a right to know the depth of this relationship and howthat affects public policy here, and the documents concerned would help the public's understanding of such. If the parties involved were truly concerned about their privacy, they should have known ahead of time that their comments would be subject to public scrutiny via freedom of information laws -- and if they didn't want their business out there, they should have kept it to themselves.