The Arkansas Supreme Court is to decide whether a professional group can sue a private company for information on a state building contract.
The Contractors for Public Protection Association want Nabholz Construction Corp. to turn over receipts and other records detailing the cost of building the Northwest Quad, a residence hall at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville.
The group argues that the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act requires Nabholz to turn over the documents. Pulaski County Circuit Judge Marion Humphrey agreed in March with the contractors and Nabholz later appealed to the high court.
Nabholz argues that as a private company, it is not subject to the state public records law.
In hearing arguments Thursday, justices asked why the contractors group didn't sue the university or at least make it a party to the case.
"We felt like the university gave us what they had. ... We had no reason not to believe them," said Ron Hope, an attorney for the contractors.
Justice Paul Danielson asked Hope if he thinks the state legislature intended for private corporations to determine what to release under the Freedom of Information Act.
Hope said Nabholz essentially agreed to share such information when it signed a building contract with a state agency.
In his circuit court ruling, Humphrey said turning over the records is "the cost of doing business with the state."
The contractors group wants a state law changed that allows state agencies to hire building contractors without competitive bids.
Most of the contracts for the state's most expensive construction projects have been awarded without competitive bidding since 2001, when the Legislature allowed the practice for state agency projects that cost more than $5 million.
Some state officials say taxpayers get a better deal when contractors are chosen based on their track record and not solely on price.
The contractors group is inspecting construction expense records statewide, and wants a detailed account of the $2.5 million the university paid Nabholz for expenses, known as general conditions, as well as other itemized costs.
Hope told the court that Nabholz is the keeper of the records because the company didn't turn over "a single receipt" for the entire project.
Nabholz said the information is proprietary and not public record. Nabholz attorney Jeffrey H. Moore said the company is not performing duties that would otherwise be performed by the university.