Granted: Emails pertaining to requester's ejection from board meeting
May 15, 2009 Filed in: Granted
| Denied
| East
Stroudsburg SD | Emails
| Predecisional
deliberations | Questions
not records
Granted in part and denied in
part: A request for electronic copies of
any and all communications between East
Stroudsburg Area School District staff and
officials following the requester's ejection from
a school board meeting.
From
the Pennsylvania Freedom of Information Coalition
Granted in part and denied in part: A request for electronic copies of any and all communications between East Stroudsburg Area School District staff and officials following the requester's ejection from a school board meeting.
The district denied the request, stating that the reports are exempt from public release as part of a predecisional communications. The Office of Open Records did not accept that argument.
"The OOR’s concern with the district’s defense is that it may imply that the elected members of the school board, who are bound by the public access provisions of the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act, are subverting the principles of that law by engaging in e-mail exchanges to avoid their obligation to deliberate in public," the ruling states.
"The OOR is required under Section 1310 of the RTKL to provide training on both the RTKL and the Sunshine Act. It cannot therefore support any interpretation of the pre-decisional deliberation exception of the RTKL that provides elected boards with a mechanism to avoid the public scrutiny otherwise required by the Sunshine Act. The OOR believes that such an interpretation would subvert the letter and the spirit of both of these critical open government laws."
The OOR directed the district to provide copies of the requested records with any nonpublic information redacted.
The requester had also asked for the name of the person or persons who authorized an email from the district's attorney and asked who will pay for that correspondence.
"Here," the OOR wrote, "the questions posed by [the requester] do not seek records, but answers to general questions. As such, the district is not required to take any action in response to these questions.
Day vs. East Stroudsburg Area School District -- AP 2009--0240
Granted in part and denied in part: A request for electronic copies of any and all communications between East Stroudsburg Area School District staff and officials following the requester's ejection from a school board meeting.
The district denied the request, stating that the reports are exempt from public release as part of a predecisional communications. The Office of Open Records did not accept that argument.
"The OOR’s concern with the district’s defense is that it may imply that the elected members of the school board, who are bound by the public access provisions of the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act, are subverting the principles of that law by engaging in e-mail exchanges to avoid their obligation to deliberate in public," the ruling states.
"The OOR is required under Section 1310 of the RTKL to provide training on both the RTKL and the Sunshine Act. It cannot therefore support any interpretation of the pre-decisional deliberation exception of the RTKL that provides elected boards with a mechanism to avoid the public scrutiny otherwise required by the Sunshine Act. The OOR believes that such an interpretation would subvert the letter and the spirit of both of these critical open government laws."
The OOR directed the district to provide copies of the requested records with any nonpublic information redacted.
The requester had also asked for the name of the person or persons who authorized an email from the district's attorney and asked who will pay for that correspondence.
"Here," the OOR wrote, "the questions posed by [the requester] do not seek records, but answers to general questions. As such, the district is not required to take any action in response to these questions.
Day vs. East Stroudsburg Area School District -- AP 2009--0240