More on court decision to stop release of school employees' addresses

| | Comments (0)
Thanks to Kim de Bourbon of the Pennsylvania Freedom of Information Coalition for clarifying my confusion about the nature of this ruling and offering important commentary on it. Click on 'comments' on the post below.

And, Marc Levy of The Associated Press has this report:

 A state appellate court judge has ordered a temporary halt to releasing school district employees' home addresses listed on records requests made under Pennsylvania's new Right-to-Know Law.

The order issued Tuesday by Commonwealth Court Senior Judge Rochelle Friedman was made in response to a petition brought late last week by the state's largest teachers' union.

Friedman was expected to schedule a hearing on the Pennsylvania State Education Association's request to permanently end the release of school employees' home addresses.
The state's newly overhauled Right-to-Know Law took effect Jan. 1. It states that public records releases should not disclose the home addresses of judges, law enforcement officers or minors.

Union spokesman Wythe Keever said Wednesday that the group acted after some of its members had expressed general concern about their private home addresses being released.

"There are documented cases in Pennsylvania and other states of teachers and other school employees who have been stalked or harassed or assaulted, by students, former students and other citizens, and some of our members expressed concern that their home addresses were going to be out there in cyber space," Keever said.

The order covers all school employees, not just union members. However, some union members allow their addresses to be listed public in phone books, Keever said.

Terry Mutchler, who directs the state Office of Open Records, said legislators heard the same arguments about releasing home addresses while they were debating the new law last year.

"We share those very deep concerns about safety," Mutchler said. "But, at the end of the day, the law is clear, in our view, the only three groups of home addresses protected is law enforcement, judges or minors."

Mutchler also said she is concerned that the union's petition and the judge's ruling circumvent the administrative process set up by the law to deal with disputes over whether certain records should be public.

Leave a comment


Type the characters you see in the picture above.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Scott Blanchard published on July 30, 2009 10:12 AM.

'Torture the unsuspecting' with public records was the previous entry in this blog.

White House Discloses Health-Care Execs' Visits (Politico) is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.