Dear Austin ISD PIA Team:

Thank you for your follow-up correspondence. I am writing to address three points raised in your email.

First, regarding item #9b: the FERPA argument does not apply to aggregated campus-level transfer counts. TEA collects and publishes exactly this type of data in PEIMS reports, and the data you reference as existing in your SIS is inherently aggregate when pulled at the campus level. A FERPA redaction would be relevant only if individual student records were at issue, which they are not. I therefore continue to request the intra-district transfer data in any reasonable format — whether tabular, summarized, or a custom report. If the District still cannot produce it from your SIS, please confirm in writing that no such data exists, and I will accept that as a final determination.

Second, regarding item #4c: a cost estimate for items #4a and #4b does not answer a statutory-basis question. Item #4c asked for the specific provision of chapter 552 or other applicable law under which the District refuses or prices each item. I am still waiting for the District to cite the statute for its refusal or pricing methodology on each item individually.

Third, regarding the proposed closure of this request: items #9b and #4c remain open and contested. Under 552.2615, the District may not treat these items as closed unless I have affirmatively declined the cost estimate for #9b, and the statutory-basis question for #4c has not been answered. If the District intends to close these items without resolution, please confirm in writing that you are doing so, and I will evaluate my next steps.

I appreciate your time and look forward to your response.

Sincerely,
Kevin Hopper
kevin.hopper1@gmail.com
