Freedom Of Information Official

Finds School Board, Former Chair Violated Law

By John Voket

A Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission official has determined that former Board of Education school board vice chairman Kathryn Fetchick’s rights under state law were violated by her own board, and, by extension, its former chairman Lillian Bittman, on three out of three contended counts.

In a copy of a report issued to the state commission on September 30, Hearing Officer Lisa Fein Siegel finds that the Newtown Board of Education violated the FOI law in each of the three instances cited by Ms Fetchick in an April 2010 appeal.

In her complaint, which is technically referred to as an appeal, Ms Fetchick stated that the board and Ms Bittman permitted part of a closed executive session to transpire during which an evaluation and criticism of Ms Fetchick’s performance and actions as a board member was the sole matter of business. This occurred despite the fact that an agenda for the meeting reserved part of the closed session for a “board self-evaluation.”

On the night of the meeting, Ms Fetchick stated that board members Richard Gains and David Nanavaty launched into a “critical evaluation” of her performance on the board. When she appealed to Ms Bittman that her rights were being violated because Ms Fetchick was neither warned of an evaluation of her performance, nor given the opportunity under the law for that evaluation to occur in public, the chairman permitted the closed session to continue.

And while she did not participate, Superintendent of Schools Janet Robinson was permitted to remain in the session in violation of the law, Ms Fetchick contended.

Following a hearing July 30 in which evidence and testimony was gathered from several parties involved on both sides of the case, the FOI official found in favor of Ms Fetchick’s claims that the Newtown school board convened in executive session for an improper purpose; the board failed to limit attendance to persons whose presence was necessary; and failed to provide adequate notice of the executive session’s intent on the meeting’s agenda.

In defense of the school board, its legal representative in the July hearing contended that the discussion qualified as a “self-evaluation … [because] … the board had agreed at a retreat ... that the voice of the board to the press and public should be solely the chair or the vice chair, and that minority members on a voted and decided issue should ‘get behind’ the vote and support it publicly.”

But Ms Siegel writes that Ms Fetchick “was the specific target of much of the criticism by two members, who believed that the complainant did not publicly support decisions of the board [majority] and did not defer to the chair as the voice of the board to the public and the press.”

The FOI official also offered two precedent cases to counter one offered in defense of the Newtown board’s action. The local school board’s legal counsel Floyd Dugas cited a 1991 case in which a “self-evaluation retreat” to discuss “interpersonal relationships” was a proper reason for an executive session.

Ms Siegel found that in Newtown’s case, the closed meeting was not held for the sole purpose of discussing interpersonal board relationships, and further stated that convening a closed session to focus on a board member’s speech to the press and public is “not an appropriate reason for an executive session as defined by the Connecticut General Statutes.”

The FOIC official also found that since Ms Fetchick qualified as a “public officer” under the law, she was entitled to notice of the closed session, and was entitled to have any criticism of her performance held in public, “but the chair refused.”

Ms Siegel’s final recommendations to the full Freedom of Information Commission will be to compel the Newtown school board to create minutes of the portion of the executive session for the April 6 meeting that discussed the so-called board self-evaluation; to henceforth comply with state laws regarding the matters defined by the commission as applicable to Ms Fetchick’s appeal; and strongly suggests the school board schedule an FOI workshop.

Contacted about the FOIC report, Ms Fetchick said she understands these are recommendations, and that the full Freedom of Information Commission may not act on them until as late as February 2011 because of a backlog of hearings.

Ms Fetchick said she was told that when that final hearing convenes, both she and the local board will be afforded ten minutes each to speak to the report and recommendations, and that she plans to participate when that hearing is convened.

Current school board Chair William Hart said he had not received confirmation of the FOIC official’s findings, so he would reserve comment until he was able to review the information. Mr Hart also confirmed that while he was not the school board chair at the time of the April 6 executive session which spurred Ms Fetchick’s complaint, he was in attendance during that session.