Sign up for our email list
Menu
I am a reporter working on a story about a public school district that has faced several allegations of teachers having inappropriate relationships with students. Those teachers undergo NY 3020-A proceedings and often reach an agreement to surrender their teaching licenses.
However, when we file FOIL requests for documents, the records we receive make no mention of what the teachers are actually accused of. We know the accusations from a deposition in a civil case, but we’re hoping to find the paper trail within the district. We’ve learned that some teachers were able to surrender their licenses before facing a fact-finding hearing, and in one case, the district entered into an agreement with a teacher, allowing him to take medical leave instead of facing punishment. These teachers were all rumored to have committed sexual misconduct.
We’re wondering why there is no record in the district’s possession disclosing the accusations against these teachers. Is this a loophole? Is there a specific document we should be asking for?
This is an interesting question.
You can request copies of settlement agreements, but if they do not mention the charges, that presents a unique situation.
Here is an opinion from the NY Committee on Open Government:
https://docs.dos.ny.gov/coog/ftext/f10149.htm
Towards the bottom of the opinion, it states:
Most recently, in LaRocca v. Board of Education of Jericho Union Free School District [632 NYS 2d 576 (1995)], the Appellate Division held that a settlement agreement was available insofar as it included admissions of misconduct. In that case, charges were initiated under §3020-a of the Education Law, but were later “disposed of by negotiation and settled by an Agreement” (id., 577) and withdrawn. The court rejected claims that the record could be characterized as an employment history that could be withheld as an unwarranted invasion of privacy, and found that a confidentiality agreement was invalid. Specifically, it was stated that:
“Having examined the settlement agreement, we find that the entire document does not constitute an ‘employment history’ as defined by FOIL (see, Matter of Hanig v. State of New York Dept. of Motor Vehicles, supra) and it is therefore presumptively available for public inspection (see, Public Officers Law § 87[2]; Matter of Farbman & Sons v. New York City Health and Hosps. Corp., supra, 62 N.Y.2d 75, 476 N.Y.S.2d 69, 464 N.E.2d 437). Moreover, as a matter of public policy, the Board of Education cannot bargain away the public’s right of access to public records (see, Board of Educ., Great Neck Union Free School Dist. v. Areman, 41 N.Y.2d 527, 394 N.Y.S.2d 143, 362 N.E.2d 943)” (id., 578, 579).
In contrast, when allegations or charges of misconduct have not been determined or did not result in disciplinary action or a finding of misconduct, the records relating to such allegations may, in my view, be withheld, as disclosure would result in an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy [see, e.g., Herald Company v. School District of City of Syracuse, 430 NYS 2d 460 (1980)]. Similarly, to the extent that charges are dismissed or allegations are found to be without merit, I believe they may be withheld.
You can find a copy of the court decision here:
Here are additional opinions and news articles that might be of interest:
•Another NY Committee on Open Government opinion
•FOIL Reveals Teacher Settlement
•FOIL Report on Teacher Misconduct Settlements
While these resources are informative, they may not directly answer your question regarding which other documents you can request.