FREEDOM
OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
| In the Matter of a Complaint by | FINAL DECISION | ||
|
Kathleen Stack and The Glastonbury Citizen, |
|||
| Complainants | |||
| against | Docket #FIC 2002-201 | ||
|
Superintendent of Schools, Glastonbury Public Schools; and Board of Education, Glastonbury Public Schools, |
|||
| Respondents | October 9, 2002 | ||
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 12, 2002, at which time the complainants and the respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint. The case caption has been changed to reflect the appropriate designation of the respondent board.
After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:
1. The respondents are public agencies within the meaning of §1-200(1), G.S.
2. It is found that on January 28, 2002, the respondent board held two consecutive special meetings during which the board voted to expel two students.
`
3. It is found that, during its meeting of February 25, 2002, the respondent board distributed minutes of the special meetings described in paragraph 2, above [hereinafter “the minutes”]. It is further found that, on February 26, 2002, a reporter for the complainant newspaper questioned the respondent superintendent about the expulsions, and that at such time the respondent superintendent informed the reporter that all findings of fact related to the two expulsions were contained in the minutes.
4. It is found that, by letter dated February 28, 2002, and filed with the Commission on March 4, 2002, the complainants appealed to the Commission, alleging that the respondents violated the Freedom of Information [hereinafter “FOI”] Act by failing to adequately provide the public with minutes of the meetings described in paragraph 2, above. Specifically, the complainants allege that the findings of fact contained in the minutes were inadequate in that they did not contain information about the offenses committed by the students, the proof submitted, which school or other rules were broken, and whether any person was injured or property was damaged.
5. It is found that the respondent board convened in executive sessions during the meetings described in paragraph 2, above, and that during such sessions the educational and student records of the two students subsequently expelled were discussed. The Commission takes administrative notice of the final decision in Docket #FIC 2000-158; John R. Gulash v. Board of Education, Trumbull Public Schools (Nov. 29, 2000), which concluded that discussion of student educational records related to an expulsion in executive session did not violate the FOI Act, and that personally identifiable information contained in student educational records is exempt from disclosure pursuant to §§1-210(b)(11), 1-210(b)(17), and 20 U.S.C. §1232g. Therefore, the minutes of the executive sessions need not include the names of the students, their parents, or any details that would personally identify particular students.
6. Section 1-225(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that: “[t]he meetings of all public agencies, except executive sessions…shall be open to the public. The votes of each member of any such public agency upon any issue before such public agency shall be reduced to writing and made available for public inspection…and shall also be recorded in the minutes of the session….”
7. Section 1-231(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that: “…[t]he minutes of
such executive session shall disclose all persons who are in attendance except job applicants who attend for the purpose of being interviewed by such agency.”
8. It is found that the minutes described in paragraph 3, above, comply with the requirements of §§1-225(a) and 1-231(a), G.S., in that they contain the persons in attendance at the executive sessions, excepting parent and student names, and that such minutes accurately reflect the votes related to the expulsions, which votes were taken upon the respondent board leaving the executive sessions. It is further found that the minutes also set forth stipulations for the expelled students’ return to school.
9. At the hearing in this matter, the complainants contended that public policy requires that more facts related to the expulsions be made public. However, the legislature has already set public policy by establishing that personally identifiable information concerning students should not be disclosed.
10. It is concluded that the respondents did not violate the FOI Act, as alleged in the complaint.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint.
1. The complaint is hereby dismissed.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of October 9, 2002.
_______________________________________
Petrea A. Jones
Acting Clerk of the Commission
PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S., THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:
Kathleen Stack and
The Glastonbury Citizen
87 Nutmeg Lane, PO Box 373
Glastonbury, CT 06033
Superintendent of Schools,
Glastonbury Public Schools;
and Board of Education,
________________________________
Petrea A. Jones
Acting Clerk of the Commission
FIC/2002-201/FD/paj/10/15/2002