{"id":107,"date":"2017-04-26T17:00:17","date_gmt":"2017-04-26T17:00:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/k12transparency.isolon.org\/?p=107"},"modified":"2018-09-09T19:08:52","modified_gmt":"2018-09-09T19:08:52","slug":"correspondence-j-h-sniders-public-testimony-msde-board-education-jan-24-2017-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/k12transparency.isolon.org\/?p=107","title":{"rendered":"Public Information Act correspondence with the Maryland State Department of Education"},"content":{"rendered":"

From:<\/strong>\u00a0‘J.H. Snider’
\nSent:<\/strong> Wednesday, April 26, 2017 11:31 AM
\nTo:<\/strong> ‘William Reinhard -MSDE-‘ <william.reinhard@maryland.gov>
\nCc:<\/strong> ‘samantha.foley1@maryland.gov’ <samantha.foley1@maryland.gov>
\nSubject:<\/strong> RE: Public Information Act request<\/p>\n

Dear Mr. Reinhard:<\/p>\n

Thank you for the USB stick with a fraction of the public information I requested.\u00a0 You claim in your accompanying printed letter that the \u201cSalary information for teachers collected by MSDE is considered licensee information,\u201d by which you presumably meant it is exempt under the Public Information Act.\u00a0 Please cite the specific exemption for salary data. Under Maryland law, raw salary data is public information; that is, not exempt under the Public Information Act.<\/p>\n

I recognize that salary information is considered very politically sensitive information in Maryland. But politically sensitive does not mean secret. When I asked for salary data from my LEA, its leadership was furious and complained to Maryland General Assembly members that they shouldn\u2019t be obliged to provide this information under the Public Information Act. General Assembly members were unresponsive to this complaint. The LEA\u2019s leadership also sent an email to thousands of its employees, mentioning me by name and complaining that I had requested this information.\u00a0 But even then, the LEA\u2019s leadership made no assertion that under Maryland law the public wasn\u2019t entitled to see individual-level salary data.<\/p>\n

In MSDE\u2019s case, access to this individual-level data is especially important because of MSDE\u2019s track record of publishing methodologically ambiguous, error prone, and unaudited salary statistical data that is widely reported as authoritative and a foundation for public deliberation over the approximately 80% of school budgets allocated to employee compensation.<\/p>\n

Since there was no mention that you would withhold salary data until this belated response to my Public Information Act request, it is especially surprising to hear MSDE make this claim now.<\/p>\n

If I understand your legal theory correctly, the salaries of licensed teachers would be exempt from disclosure but not the countless other LEA employees, such as custodians, long-term substitutes, coaches, cafeteria workers, and administrative secretaries, whose occupations aren\u2019t licensed.\u00a0 Most county and state employees also would be exempt, as they, too, aren\u2019t licensed.<\/p>\n

In short, Public Information Act provision \u00a7 4-333 is not relevant to the salary disclosure question.\u00a0 The relevant opinion of Maryland\u2019s Attorney General, as included in Maryland Public Information Act Manual<\/a> (page I-5), is:<\/p>\n

The term \u201cpublic record\u201d explicitly encompasses the salaries paid to public employees, including bonuses and performance awards.\u00a0 GP \u00a7 4-101(j)(2); Moberly v. He rboldsheimer , 276 Md. 211 (1975); Opinion of the Attorney General No. 81-034 (Nov. 23, 1981) (unpublished); 83 Opinions of the Attorney General 192 (1998).<\/p>\n

The Public Information Act Manual (Appendix E-8) also includes this definition of a \u201cpublic record\u201d:<\/p>\n

(2) \u201cPublic record\u201d includes a document that lists the salary of an employee of a unit or an instrumentality of the State or of a political subdivision.<\/p>\n

If you believe that the Maryland AG\u2019s legal opinion is incorrect, please provide an exact citation to the legal authority on which you rely. I am copying below the entire section of the Public Information Act provision \u00a7 4-333 that you cited for your exemption claim and which makes no mention of salary data. As a matter of both common sense and legal precedent, it should be clear that disclosures appropriate for, say, licensed cosmetologists and landscape designers, would be less rigorous than those for government employees.<\/p>\n

4-333.\u00a0 LICENSING RECORDS.<\/p>\n

(a) Subject to subsections (b) through (d) of this section, a custodian shall deny inspection of the part of a public record that contains information about the licensing of an individual in an occupation or a profession.<\/p>\n

(b) A custodian shall allow inspection of the part of a public record that gives:<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0(1) the name of the licensee;<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0(2) the business address of the licensee or, if the business address is not available, the home address of the licensee after the custodian redacts any information that identifies the location as the home address of an individual with a disability as defined in \u00a7 20-701 of the State Government Article;<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0(3) the business telephone number of the licensee;<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0(4) the educational and occupational background of the licensee;<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0(5) the professional qualifications of the licensee;<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0(6) any orders and findings that result from formal disciplinary actions; and<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0(7) any evidence that has been provided to the custodian to meet the requirements of a statute as to financial responsibility.<\/p>\n

(c) A custodian may allow inspection of other information about a licensee if:<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0(1) the custodian finds a compelling public purpose; and<\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0(2) the rules or regulations of the official custodian allow the inspection.<\/p>\n

(d) Except as otherwise provided by this section or other law, a custodian shall allow inspection by the person in interest.<\/p>\n

(e) A custodian who sells lists of licensees shall omit from the lists the name of any licensee, on written request of the licensee.<\/p>\n

Please note, too, that in my Public Information Act request I requested all employee record data specified in MSDE\u2019s Staff Reporting System Specifications and Procedures Manual that wasn\u2019t exempt under the Public Information Act.\u00a0 Specifically, I specified: \u201cThe data fields for confidential information should be included in the header but left blank for the individual employee data records.\u201d In your response, you did include the header field labels. But it is hard for me to imagine that not only the salary data fields but many of the other data fields, such as those relating to FTE status, are also legally exempt. Again, if you claim otherwise, please provide the specific legal citation justifying the exemption.<\/p>\n

It is already long past the 30-day limit specified under the Public Information Act for fulfilling my Public Information Act request. I\u2019d welcome your prioritizing the fulfillment of my overdue Public Information Act request.<\/p>\n

Sincerely,<\/p>\n

J.H. Snider, President
\niSolon.org<\/p>\n

\n

From:<\/strong> William Reinhard -MSDE- [mailto:william.reinhard@maryland.gov<\/a>]
\nSent:<\/strong> Thursday, April 20, 2017 12:13 PM
\nTo:<\/strong> \u2018J.H. Snider\u2019
\nSubject:<\/strong> Follow-up on your PIA<\/p>\n

Good Afternoon Mr. Snider-<\/p>\n

We’ve completed work on your most recent PIA.\u00a0 The data files are too large to send via email, so we’ve moved them onto a flash drive.\u00a0 Please let me know the best physical address to send this to.<\/p>\n

Bill Reinhard<\/p>\n

\n

From:<\/strong> J.H. Snider
\nSent:<\/strong> Wednesday, April 12, 2017 3:44 PM
\nTo:<\/strong> ‘William Reinhard -MSDE-‘ <william.reinhard@maryland.gov>
\nCc:<\/strong> ‘samantha.foley1@maryland.gov’ <samantha.foley1@maryland.gov>
\nSubject:<\/strong> RE: Public Information Act request<\/p>\n

Dear Mr. Reinhard:<\/p>\n

Please update me on your plans for fulfilling my March 29, 2017 Public Information Act request (copied below).\u00a0 Maryland\u2019s Public Information Act specifies a ten-day reply period.\u00a0 If you don\u2019t intend to respond to my request, it would be a courtesy and possibly save you time, too, to tell me so.\u00a0 Meanwhile, I will look forward to your fulfillment of my request within the thirty-day period required by law.<\/p>\n

Sincerely,<\/p>\n

J.H. Snider, President
\niSolon.org<\/p>\n

\n

From:<\/strong>\u00a0‘J.H. Snider’
\nSent:<\/strong> Wednesday, March 29, 2017 2:24 PM
\nTo:<\/strong> William Reinhard -MSDE- <william.reinhard@maryland.gov>
\nSubject:<\/strong> Public Information Act request<\/p>\n

Dear Mr. Reinhard:<\/p>\n

You have not responded to my March 15, 2017 response to your March 8, 2017 response to my February 10, 2017 Public Information Act request.\u00a0 To hopefully speed things along, I am recasting part of my March 15, 2017 response as a separate Public Information Act request.<\/p>\n

Under the Maryland Public Information Act, State Government Article (SG) \u00a7\u00a7 10-611, et seq., I request \u201ca) the employee records, excluding confidential data, for every public employee in every LEA in Maryland State, b) the written advice from the office of Maryland\u2019s Attorney General concerning which data fields contain confidential information, and c) the definition of salary used in the \u201csalary\u201d data field, which may be one of the definitions of salary you have previously provided me.\u00a0 The data should be provided in a single Excel file with a heading field for each data field (i.e., all the employee level data fields you collect from the LEAs, as you listed [in your March 8, 2016 email] below from the detailed manual specifying such fields).\u00a0 The data fields for confidential information should be included in the header but left blank for the individual employee data records.\u00a0 If either the headings or contents of data fields include codes, the description of those codes should be provided separately, such as on a different worksheet within the same Excel file.\u201d<\/p>\n

I request that all the information be emailed to me in an electronic format (i.e., no paper copies).\u00a0 I also request that where an electronic document exists in a machine-readable format such as an Excel spreadsheet or Word document, it be provided in that format rather than scanned in an unsearchable format such as a pdf.<\/p>\n

If fulfilling this Public Information Act request is expected to take more than 2 hours, then starting with a) and moving to b) and c), each item should be costed out separately in your response to me.\u00a0 In addition, in the unlikely event that any information cannot be provided to me in an electronic format, it should also be costed out separately.<\/p>\n

I look forward to your response within the ten days required by law.<\/p>\n

Sincerely,<\/p>\n

J.H. Snider, President
\niSolon.org<\/p>\n

\n

From:<\/strong>\u00a0‘J.H. Snider’
\nSent:<\/strong> Wednesday, March 15, 2017 5:59 PM
\nTo:<\/strong> ‘William Reinhard -MSDE-‘
\nSubject:<\/strong> RE: Follow-up on your PIA Request<\/p>\n

Dear Mr. Reinhard:<\/p>\n

Thank you for your response.\u00a0 What follows below in indented text is my February 10, 2017 Public Information Act request, including your response on March 8, 2017 (in green<\/span>) and my response to that today (in purple<\/span>).<\/p>\n

Under the Maryland Public Information Act, State Government Article (SG) \u00a7\u00a7 10-611, et seq., I have two follow-up document requests related to your reply to my December 16, 2016 Public Information Act request: 1) The documents related to the salary \u201caudit\u201d request (request #2), and 2) the LEA retention data request (request #6).<\/p>\n

1) The audit request:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. I request links to the audits MSDE has done, if any, on the salary data LEAs have provided to MSDE from FY2007 through FY2016.\u00a0 If no audits have been done, please respond \u201cnone.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Reinhard: None.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Snider: It appears that whomever you consulted for your information may have either had incomplete information or a different definition of \u201caudit\u201d than I intended.\u00a0 By audit I meant any written information from MSDE noting that provided LEA salary data were incorrect.\u00a0 On page B-1 of MSDE\u2019s \u201cStaff Reporting System Specifications and Procedures Manual\u20142016-2017,\u201d published in June 2016, MSDE reported finding such incorrect salary data on LEA reports to MSDE: \u201cIn previous years, common errors were found to be associated with full-time equivalency, type of experience, missing subject codes for teachers, school number, budget code, position code, salary<\/strong> [bold added], and failure to provide separation data for staff who are no longer employed.\u201d Please send me the supporting documents that substantiate this claim of incorrect salary data.\u00a0 Also, I only have a printed copy of the document I have cited.\u00a0 If it is available online for the public to see, please send me a link.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Reinhard: \u201cyou asked for a report on errors in salary data.\u00a0 We do not generate reports on errors; rather, data collection is an iterative process in this program.\u00a0 When errors are found, the data is corrected and updated.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

    Snider: In my request I clarified that \u201cBy audit I meant any written information from MSDE noting that provided LEA salary data were incorrect.\u201d\u00a0 I did not specifically limit my document request to reports. Emails about the incorrect data were also covered. \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

    Reinhard: \u201cyou asked about the public nature of the \u201cStaff Reporting System Specifications and Procedures Manual.\u201d\u00a0 It is designed specifically for local system staff working on the system.\u00a0 It is available to the public on request — we sent you a copy on November 11, 2016.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

    Snider: I have correspondence from you dated November 10, 2016, not November 11, 2016.\u00a0 That correspondence includes a single attachment: \u201cMinimum\/Maximum\/Actual Salaries and Salary Schedules\u20142016-2017, WDCS LEA User Manual.\u201d\u00a0 It did not include a link or attachment to a document entitled: \u201cStaff Reporting System Specifications and Procedures Manual\u20142016-2017.\u201d\u00a0 The document provided also did not include the text I cited.\u00a0 If I am missing correspondence from you dated November 11, 2016, please resend it. Otherwise, please send me an electronic copy, preferably an online link, to the requested document.\u00a0 My apologies in advance if I have missed some relevant correspondence that you sent me.\u00a0 I believe I\u2019ve gone through all our correspondence and haven\u2019t found a citation to that MSDE document, which I located via a non-MSDE source.<\/span><\/p>\n

    2) The LEA data request:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. In Excel or other machine-readable format, I request all teacher retention data, including any accompanying annotations, submitted to MSDE\u2019s Web Data Collection System (WDCS) by the Anne Arundel County LEA from FY2012 to FY2016.\u00a0 It\u2019s my understanding that because this is aggregate data, the files will be tiny.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Reinhard: No current report exists for this information and would require several days to create.\u00a0 As this request is LEA specific, please make inquiry to Anne Arundel County.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

      Snider: Please explain why it is so difficult for MSDE to provide the machine-readable data on teacher retention\/attrition that I requested.\u00a0 If the submitted information is no different from the data that MSDE publishes<\/a><\/span> on its website and that you pointed me to, then this query is moot.\u00a0 But I\u2019m looking for information that would allow me to analyze the data in a meaningful way; specifically, I am interested in teacher attrition both before and after a teacher reaches the so-called \u201cpension cliff.\u201d\u00a0 The pension cliff is the point in a teacher\u2019s career when they are fully vested in their pension benefits.\u00a0 I am looking for information that would allow me to pinpoint when teachers reach the pension cliff (this requires knowing their age and years of creditable service) in relation to the year they left LEA employment.\u00a0 The MSDE website you pointed me to lacked this information.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

      If I\u2019ve asked for the wrong set of data to analyze the pension cliff, please point me to another set of MSDE attrition data that school administrators use to analyze the impact of the pension cliff on teacher attrition.\u00a0 Any state or local school administrator genuinely interested in retaining teachers would need to analyze this information.\u00a0 Thus, I\u2019ve assumed that MSDE\u2019s retention data\u2014whether it is labeled \u201cretention data\u201d or something else\u2014would include this information.\u00a0 If my assumption is wrong about MSDE collecting this information, please let me know.<\/span><\/p>\n

      Reinhard: \u201cit may be possible for us to provide you with the information you need for your research\u2026. We work with the Maryland Attorney General\u2019s office when responding to requests for database information, and their advice guides our work\u2026 Please give us a list of data fields you are interested in acquiring, and we will consider your request.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

      Snider: Thank you for offering to provide me with the information I requested and for asking me to clarify which data fields I sought.\u00a0 Specifically, please provide me with a) the employee records, excluding confidential data, for every public employee in every LEA in Maryland State, b) the written advice from the office of Maryland\u2019s Attorney General concerning which data fields contain confidential information, and c) the definition of salary used in the \u201csalary\u201d data field, which may be one of the definitions of salary you have previously provided me.\u00a0 The data should be provided in a single Excel file with a heading field for each data field (i.e., all the employee level data fields you collect from the LEAs, as you listed below from the detailed manual specifying such fields).\u00a0 The data fields for confidential information should be included in the header but left blank for the individual employee data records.\u00a0 If either the headings or contents of data fields include codes, the description of those codes should be provided separately, such as on a different worksheet within the same Excel file.\u00a0 I am thankful for your not instigating a harassment campaign in response to my request for this public salary-related information. \u00a0When I\u2019ve requested this information from local LEAs in the past, that has not always been the case.<\/span><\/p>\n

      Sincerely,<\/p>\n

      J.H. Snider, President
      \niSolon.org<\/p>\n

      \n

      From:<\/strong>\u00a0‘William Reinhard -MSDE’
      \nSent:<\/strong> Wednesday, March 08, 2017 1:55 PM
      \nTo:<\/strong>\u00a0‘J.H. Snider’
      \nSubject:<\/strong> Follow-up on your PIA Request<\/p>\n

      March 8, 2017<\/p>\n

      Dear Mr. Snider:<\/p>\n

      We are in receipt of your February 24 request, in search of information regarding Maryland\u2019s teacher salaries.<\/p>\n

      Your requests have targeted MSDE\u2019s chart, \u201cSalary Range for Ten-Month Teachers in Public Schools, 2014-15, included in the 2014-15 MSDE Fact Book.\u00a0 We have provided you numerous documents and information related to that chart and its related report.<\/p>\n

      Most recently, you asked for a report on errors in salary data.\u00a0 We do not generate reports on errors; rather, data collection is an iterative process in this program.\u00a0 When errors are found, the data is corrected and updated.<\/p>\n

      In addition, you have asked for retention data.\u00a0 We do not collect retention data, per se; rather, we collect data on teachers and their years of service which may closely reflect retention.<\/p>\n

      Finally, you asked about the public nature of the \u201cStaff Reporting System Specifications and Procedures Manual.\u201d\u00a0 It is designed specifically for local system staff working on the system.\u00a0 It is available to the public on request — we sent you a copy on November 11, 2016.<\/p>\n

      Your original inquiry was about the \u201cSalary Range\u201d chart, which is developed using the salary schedules made available by local school systems.\u00a0 But your interest seems to be in the actual salary data of Maryland\u2019s public school teachers, particularly those in Anne Arundel County.\u00a0\u00a0 MSDE collects this information for other research, and it may be of use for you to understand what the Department collects for each educator.\u00a0 This list was already included in the manual provided.<\/p>\n