Language adding public grade school teachers to the list of public employees whose residential addresses are exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is moving one step closer to becoming law after a favorable vote from the Government Oversight Committee (GOC).
The proposed bill is one of several introduced in this legislative session that proposes to expand the FOIA exemption for various categories of public workers. While the exemption for public teachers has not been previously introduced, several other bills have previously appeared. Another bill that would add employees in the attorney general’s office to the list of employees covered by the exemption was voted forward last week.
GOC was previously set to vote to favorably vote the teacher exemption forward but held the bill back.
The joint favorable substitute report that GOC voted to advance also included a proposed task force that would address other bills seeking to expand the residential address exemption.
While updated bill language was not available at the time GOC voted for the bill, discussion during the committee meeting indicated the task force would include six members representing the majority party, 2 representing the minority party, the attorney general’s office, the secretary of state’s office, municipal representatives from clerks or registrars offices, as well as representatives of teachers, journalists, an organization that represents FOIA, and the Freedom of Information Commission.
Sen. Sujata Gadkar-Wilcox, D-Trumbull, prefaced the vote on the updated bill by noting the committee had heard testimony from teachers asking for the exemption and stating that due to “heightened tensions” it seemed warranted. Gadkar-Wilcox also said that the committee had heard concerns from FOIA advocates concerned about the increased number of proposed exemptions the legislature has heard in recent years and that the proposed study of the residential address exemption was added as a result.
Sen. Rob Sampson, R-Wolcott, voted against advancing the bill after questioning whether it was necessary. Sampson characterized the existing exemptions as falling into categories of first responders or public workers who come into contact with disgruntled residents through their jobs with administrative agency decisions. He asked why teachers rose to needing the same level of dicussion.
Gadkar-Wilcox stated that she likened an increasingly tense political climate to the situation workers at the Department of Children and Families and the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities face.
Sampson further stated that while he was sympathetic to teachers’ concerns, the question was where the line should be drawn. He noted similar bills to expand the residential address exemption that have been advanced in recent sessions have not been acted on by the committee. Sampson noted that the GOC’s purpose was to create government transparency and oversight, but said the bill would do the opposite by hiding information from the public.
Rep. Devin Carney, R-Old Saybrook, also questioned the inclusion of certain representatives on the proposed task force to study the address exemption, including town clerks, registrars and educational representatives. Carney said he was concerned that the proposed makeup of the task force only contained a few interested parties who would likely be opposed to expanding it, including journalists, FOI advocates, and the FOIC.
Votes were held open at the conclusion of GOC’s meeting, and there were enough favorable votes to move the bill forward.
GOC also voted during the same meeting to advance a bill that would require the Office of Policy and Management (OPM) to study the time it takes state agencies to respond to FOIA requests.
Was this article helpful?
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
It’s fine but strange. It’s been voted forward for reasons I imagine will surface through colorful amendments. Perhaps teachers addresses are more worthy of protection in times of low teacher shortage. Lawyers make anywhere on average from $450 to $750 an hour. Teachers make about $20 to $25. The schooling is relatively the same, but the bar for teachers in Connecticut is set much higher than it is for practicing lawyers. But where is the line? Can we add an amendment to include all registered Democrats? It would be a great incentivizer, especially for those on the fence. Maybe add another amendment to include advocates for lithium-ion battery storage facilities in small rural towns, large quantity generators of low-hum static noise, prospects for burning medical waste with no to low oversight, and any biological male who demonstrates the character, strength, and courage to compete against biological females in women’s sports. But make sure we can still FOI the addresses of domestic violence victims. We need to know where they are so we can turn up the height on their low-stress lives.
I don’t get this bill. Has anyone thought to add an amendment for gun owners? Exempt gun owners. Perhaps that’s a bill for a different time, a new era, under a new administration. The bill votes forward, a committee is formed to whiteboard amendments. The 2 Democrats can see the board through the window in the parking lot, but the glass is soundproof. People don’t forget. At least that’s what they say.