BOARD OF ED COVERS UP FIRE MARSHALL'S REPORT

by Stewart Lilker

On June 7th, at a Freeport Board of Education planning meeting, the Board blasted through the Fire Marshall’s report in one minute and thirty seconds. On June 13th, your reporter, under the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL), requested a copy of that report. On June 16th, even though the Fire Marshall’s report was clearly in possession of the district, the district Records Access Officer, Dr. Tony Ciaglia, responded to the FOIL request stating that, "As the information becomes available we will contact you and inform you as to when it may be picked up and the cost.

Your reporter waited until June 30th, hoping that the district would do the decent and legal thing and release the report. It didn’t. On June 30th, your reporter appealed the denial of the FOIL request to the Superintendent of Schools, Josephine Moffett. As of July 14th, the Superintendent continued to ignore the appeal.

At other meetings in which the Fire Marshall’s report was discussed, it was explained by then Board President Dante Grover and other members of the school administration that there were no serious violations. "There were only minor technical violations."

FreeportNYNews, in spite of the stonewalling of the report by the District, has been able to obtain a copy of this report. The "technical violations" that Grover and the administration have been covering up affect the lives of the children and the staff of the district.

The Fire Marshall’s Report

The Atkinson School was the single worst performing school in the district. Principal Jan Wilson's school had serious violations of the exiting provisions required by the NYS Fire Code. This means that the fire exits were not maintained clear and unobstructed at all times. The exits were blocked by materials which appeared to be stored in the exits. Also contributing to the unsafe exits was the fact that the access to the exits were not clear and unobstructed. Incredibly, it appears from the Fire Marshall’s Report that there were exit doors that were locked, chained or otherwise rendered inoperative from the inside. Even though required by law, it seems that Ms. Wilson couldn’t even see that the written procedures for evacuating the building were conspicuously posted in appropriate locations. Additionally, the exit signs were not maintained.

Also, in clear violation of the law was the fact that the warning signs advising occupants to use the stairs during a fire emergency were not provided at every elevator landing. Grover chose to call this a "technical violation."

Unfortunately, the violations at Wilson’s fifth and sixth grade school did not stop there. Combustible materials were apparently stored in the boiler room. Extension cords were used in place of permanent wiring and there was exposed wiring in the school that was not properly enclosed and protected, making the students susceptible to electrocution. Outlet plates were missing. Gas appliances shutoff valves were either inaccessible or not provided and the kitchen exhaust hoods and grease removal equipment were not being maintained. FNYN asked some of the kitchen personnel if they knew who was supposed to maintain these systems. Nobody knew.

The storage, handling and use of hazardous chemicals was not in accordance with generally accepted standards such as the manufacturers' printed instructions and recommendations. Even chemicals that, in combination with other substances could bring about a fire, explosion, or the release of toxic gases were not isolated from each other.

These are not all the violations at the Atkinson School.

Principal Northover’s High School was not far behind Atkinson in the amount of violations. The violations at the High School were just as serious and in some cases even more serious and dangerous to the health and safety of the students and staff.

The only building in the district that was violation free was the Administration Building.

(Public Officers Law Art 6)

Via Fax: 2 pages
Date: June 13, 2000
TO: Records Access Officer
Freeport School District
Freeport NY 11520

Dear Records Access Officer:

Under the provisions of the NYS Freedom of Information Law, Art 6 of the Pub Off Law, I am requesting that the following records be made available:

1. The Fire Commissioner’s Report that was presented to the Board of Education on June7,2000 at the planning meeting at 7:30 p.m. and completed by 7:31:30 p.m. The report was made by Inspector Lerner.

2. The report that was filed with the State by the Fire Commissioner and was copied to the district.

3. The book of violations that Spiro Colaitis said was down stairs during the following exchange.:

Fire Marshall: ... definitely the doors, the exit windows above the doors and nothing hanging from end to end that could also fall and trip the student, or God forbid, catch fire.

Grover: In all fairness to the district, since Dan [Romano] is not in that position any longer, could you review specifically what you have found in each one of the schools and this way we can be doubly sure that we have corrected all of our problems... so that we get nothing but rave reviews on the second inspection.

Fire Marshall: All the schools do have a book filled out individually.

Grover: The building principals have that?

Colitus: We have it down stairs.

As you know, FOIL requires that an agency respond to a request within five business days of receipt of a request. As these records are readily available, there should be no reason for any delay in making them avilable.

If for any reason any portion of my request is denied, please inform me of the reasons for the denial in writing and provide the name and address of the person or body to whom an appeal should be directed.

Should you provide a copy of the requested records, I am requesting that you certify to the correctness of such copy, or as the case may be, should you not provide said record(s) you certify that you do not have possession of said record(s) or that such record(s) cannot be found after diligent search.

Thanking you in advance for your cooperation.

Sincerely,
Stewart S Lilker

June 30, 2000
To: Ms. J. Moffett
Supt. Frpt. UFSD 9
235 N Ocean Ave.
Freeport NY 11520

Subject: Appeal of denial of FOIL request of November 5, 1999 [sic June 13, 2000]

Dear Madam Superintendent:

Pursuant to the laws of NYS I am appealing the constructive denial of my FOIL request of June 13, 2000, in which I asked for the Fire Marshall’s Report presented to the Board Of Education on June 7, 2000.

Once again, the Record Access Officer, Dr. Tony Ciaglia, has violated the spirit, intent of FOIL, by stonewalling my request and by failing do deliver a document for inspection that is already in the possession of the District.

On June 7th and again on June 21st, Spiro Colaitis, the Director of Maintenance, said the report was in his office.

Mr. Robert Freeman, the esteemed Director of the Committee on Open Government has stated the following regarding "reasonableness" in a letter dated June 1, 1999:

I point out that the notion of reasonableness was stressed in opinions previously rendered at the requests of other residents of the Village. Specifically, it was stated that:

"...although an agency must grant access to records, deny access or acknowledge the receipt of a request within five business days, when such acknowledgment is given, there is no precise time period within which an agency must grant or deny access to records. The time needed to do so may be dependent upon the volume of a request, the possibility that other requests have been made, the necessity to conduct legal research, the search and retrieval techniques used to locate the records and the like. In short, when an agency acknowledges

the receipt of a request because more than five business days may be needed to grant or deny a request, so long as it provides an approximate date indicating when the request will be granted or denied, and that date is reasonable in view of the attendant circumstances, I believe that the agency would be acting in compliance with law."

It was also suggested that:

"...in my view, every law must be implemented in a manner that gives reasonable effect to its intent, and I point out that in its statement of legislative intent, §84 of the Freedom of Information Law states that "it is incumbent upon the state and its localities to extend public accountability wherever and whenever feasible." Therefore, if records are clearly available to the public under the Freedom of Information Law, or if they are readily retrievable, there may be no basis for a lengthy delay in disclosure. As the Court of Appeals has asserted:

"...the successful implementation of the policies motivating the enactment of the Freedom of Information Law centers on goals as broad as the achievement of a more informed electorate and a more responsible and responsive officialdom. By their very nature such objectives cannot hope to be attained unless the measures taken to bring them about permeate the body politic to a point where they become the rule rather than the exception. The phrase 'public accountability wherever and whenever feasible' therefore merely punctuates with explicitness what in any event is implicit" [Westchester News v. Kimball, 50 NY 2d 575, 579 (1980)].

In sum, due to its size and the number of requests received by DMV, its likely that a delay in disclosure of records of approximately a month is reasonable. For the same reasons, the size of the Village of Fleischmanns and the nature of the requests that have been described to me, it seems that the Village, to comply with law, should be granting access to accessible records within five business days of their receipt of the requests. (emphasis added)

Public Officers Law § 89 4 (a) states:

4. (a) Except as provided in subdivision five of this section, any person denied access to a record may within thirty days appeal in writing such denial to the head, chief executive or governing body of the entity, or the person therefor designated by such head, chief executive, or governing body, who shall within ten business days of the receipt of such appeal fully explain in writing to the person requesting the record the reasons for further denial, or provide access to the record sought. In addition, each agency shall immediately forward to the committee on open government a copy of such appeal when received by the agency and the ensuing determination thereon. (emphases added)

Madam Superintendent, I have again brought your attention to Public Officers Law § 89 4 (a) above, as you have not always, if ever, complied with the requirements of this section. Have you not so complied under the advise of counsel, I remind you that counsel is not authorized to permit you to violate the law. For your convenience, the address of the Committee on Open Government is the Committee on Open Government, Dept. of State, 41 State Street, Albany, NY 12231.

Thanking you in advance for your cooperation.