Two bills adding exemptions to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) are likely to return for the third consecutive legislative session after the Government Administration and Elections Committee (GAE) today voted to raise them as concepts.
The first bill would make many types of records generated by researches at public universities exempt from disclosure under FOIA. The second would add to the list of types of public employees whose residential addresses are exempt from disclosure under FOIA.
While the GAE voted only to advance the concepts for these bills, meaning there’s currently no language or filing number to reference, both have previously appeared during the 2024 and 2023 legislative sessions and language the committee introduces is likely to be similar if not identical to language from previous years.
Currently, GAE’s concept for exempting higher education records is titled “An Act Establishing an Exemption from Disclosure for Certain Higher Education Records Pertaining to Teaching or Research Under the Freedom of Information Act.” This is identical to the title of the bill when it was introduced in 2024. The 2023 version of the bill also referenced studying in its title.
In 2023, the version of the bill that was initially filed exempted “[a]ny data, record, or information of a proprietary nature that is produced or collected by or for the faculty or staff of a public institution of higher education in the conduct of study or research on medical, scientific, technical or scholarly issues or constituting pedagogical materials, including records created by legal clinics for teaching purposes.” It excluded financial or administrative data and information or records that were publicly released.
Public hearing testimony submitted in favor of the bill came largely from University of Connecticut (UConn) employees and representatives, who argued it was necessary to stop the use of FOIA to abuse and threaten staff.
But the Freedom of Information Commission (FOIC) and Connecticut Council on Freedom of Information (CCFOI) submitted testimony opposed to the bill. CCFOI’s testimony drew concern to the breadth of records that would be exempt from public scrutiny if it was enacted and stating it was unnecessary because other measures are in place to protect the safety of university employees.
“Because virtually all research at our public institutions is paid for with public funds, the proposal threatens rightful public access to literally all manner of research material under the guise of it being ‘proprietary’.” CCFOI co-chair Jeffrey Daniels wrote.
The FOIC expressed concern that the proposal was “extremely broad.”
The language in the bill was updated to exempt records “maintained or kept on file by or for the faculty or staff of a public institution of higher education arising out of study, teaching or research on medical, artistic, scientific, technical, legal or other scholarly issues.” It further specified this included records for legal clinics, but did not include financial records. An amendment from the Senate floor struck references to study and to technical records. The bill passed the Senate but it died on the House of Representatives’ calendar.
Identical language to this was introduced again in 2024 and drew similar support and criticisms. The bill was placed on the Senate calendar but never received a vote.
During its January 17 meeting the GAE voted to advance the concept, which co-chair Sen. Mae Flexer, D-Windham, introduced as a bill that the committee had previously considered and was about limiting access to higher education records “in certain circumstances.” There was no discussion on the concept.
The committee also voted to advance a concept that would make more public employees’ residential addresses exempt from FOIA disclosure. It has twice voted in favor of similar bills.
Currently, employees of a limited list of agencies, including the Division of Criminal Justice and the Department of Children and Families, are exempt from FOIA disclosure, are as several categories of municipal workers, such as firefighters.
In 2022, GAE advanced a bill to add employees in the attorney general’s office to the list. It was passed by the House but never taken up by the Senate.
In 2023, the bill added judicial marshals, disability determination services unit employees in the Department of Aging and Disability Services (DADS), employees of the Bureau of Rehabilitation Services within DADS, and attorney’s general office employees to the list. It never got beyond a public hearing.
In 2024, the GAE voted to approve a bill that added language specifying that the residential addresses of any public agency employee was exempt from FOIA disclosure, unless residency was a condition of their employment.
The bill drew the support of a number of public employee unions, who argued it was necessary to protect the personal security of them and their families, particularly for state workers whose line of work could result in being targeted by disgruntled people to whom they provided services.
It was opposed by the ACLU of Connecticut and the FOIC, who pointed to recent legislative actions that limited the statute prohibiting disclosure of state workers’ addresses on voter records and land records to demonstrate the complexity of the issue. The FOIC also noted there is an existing statutory process allowing people to request a business address be used in lieu of a residential address on public documents that contain residential addresses.
The bill was placed on the Senate calendar but never received a vote.
There was no discussion about the concept before the GAE voted to advance it, with the vote falling largely on partisan lines.
Inside Investigator has reported on how private citizens’ information is available through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) while public employee data is often protected from disclosure.
Was this article helpful?
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
