SWB Yankees LLC v. Wintermantel
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
No. 44 MAP 2011
May 29, 2012
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania ruled that the records of a private government contractor performing government functions on behalf of a government agency, in this case a private contractor’s records relating to bids to run the concessions at a county-owned stadium, are subject to disclosure under the Right to Know Law.
The court defined “government function” as any “non-ancillary undertaking of government” — a definition the court acknowledged was vague and would be clarified in future cases.
Background
SWB Yankees LLC is a private company that operates and manages the minor league baseball stadium in Scranton under a contract that it has with a county agency, the Multi-Purpose Stadium Authority of Lackawanna County.
Gretchen Wintermantel, a reporter for The Times-Tribune, requested records of the bids that SWB Yankees received for concessions at the stadium. SWB Yankees refused to turn over the records, claiming it was a private company not subject to the Right to Know Law.
Supreme Court decision
The court ruled that a broad definition of “government function” is appropriate and most consistent with the purpose of the Right to Know Law — giving citizens access to information concerning the activities of government. While operating a baseball stadium may not be a traditional government function, the court noted that the government has undertaken many functions – including liquor sales and gambling – that are not traditionally functions of government.
The stadium authority was created for the purpose of managing and operating a baseball stadium. It had delegated that function to SWB Yankees, and that company’s efforts to hire a concessionaire were central to that function.
As the court explained, the concessions contract was a “non-ancillary undertaking of government.” The court noted that future cases would determine which government functions are “non-ancillary,” but noted that such functions must relate to “some substantial facet of the agency’s role and responsibilities” and not mere “routine services.”
- May 6, 2009 – OOR Final Determination – AP 2009-0184 – Wintermantel v Lackawanna Co Stadium Authority
- July 22, 2010 – Commonwealth Court Opinion Affirming OOR – No. 2037 CD 2009 7-22-10 – SWB Yankees LLC v Wintermantel and Times Tribune
- October 28, 2011 – Briefs to Pennsylvania Supreme Court
- May 29, 2012 – Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Majority Opinion – No. 44 MAP 2011 – SWB Yankees LLC v Wintermantel and Times Tribune
- May 29, 2012 – Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Concurring Opinion – No. 44 MAP 2011 – SWB Yankees LLC v Wintermantel and Times Tribune