Connolly questioned public health agency FOIA accessibility before his death // Former Richmond fire department employee under investigation for potential fraudulent spending // Recidivism rates touted by Virginia state prison system, contributing factors not fully disclosed // Audit shows Roanoke spent $5 million over city’s general fund budget

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on Thursday upheld a lower court’s decision to dismiss a lawsuit brought by At-large Lynchburg Councilman Martin Misjuns, who argued his termination from the city’s fire department violated his rights to free speech and religion. The opinion, written by Judge Roger Gregory, affirmed the rulings by Judges Norman Moon and Robert Ballou, of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia, to dismiss the councilman’s lawsuit. The other two appeals court judges who heard the case joined Gregory in affirming the lower court’s dismissal of the lawsuit. In a concurring opinion, Oral arguments were heard at the appeals court in Richmond on March 20 where the three-judge panel grilled Misjuns’ lawyers about how they plan to overcome legal precedent that allows municipalities to fire employees who disrupt a workplace through speech that would otherwise be protected if they were not a public employee. “His transparently bigoted remarks gave rise to a reasonable apprehension on the part of Lynchburg’s citizens that the Fire Department’s emergency-response tasks would not be carried out in an even-handed and unbiased way,” Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III wrote in a concurring opinion.

The call to reinstate five bus drivers grows louder. Dozens rallied outside City Hall, right before going into the Tuesday night school board meeting. Bus drivers, community activists and residents all pushed for school board members to reinstate the drivers terminated nearly 6 weeks ago for allegedly participating in an unlawful protest. 12 On Your Side sent a FOIA to request information concerning Richmond Public School’s investigation into the five bus drivers. LiUNA the bus driver’s union requested the same documents. They received it first and shared it with us. The documents include emails and text messages between several division leaders, including the transportation director, Ingrid Reynolds, and the chief of staff, Shareyna Chang. 12 On Your Side reached out to RPS to ask for a comment about reason behind the terminations, however they said all they are able to say is that the five drivers no longer works for the division.

Public speakers at Loudoun County School Board meetings are increasingly being interrupted by board Chair Melinda M. Mansfield if they criticize school division employees or students. The interruptions have increased since an October meeting, when Mansfield ended the public speaking portion early after several speakers made references to, but did not name, a student they said was attending Loudoun Valley High School in Purcellville. The policy requires speakers to “generalize” any remarks that ” target, or criticize or attack” any student or employee. Speakers are also forbidden from mentioning “any characteristics where the information would personally identify that student or employee to others in the school or broader LCPS community.” Mansfield noted in an email to the Loudoun Times-Mirror that Virginia school boards aren’t required to allow public speaking at meetings, and said it is a “privilege, not a right.” Mansfield, who isn’t seeking reelection, said the policy has easy-to-understand language to explain what comments are prohibited.

A new drafted policy was brought to the Suffolk School Board for a first reading at the May 22 meeting. The policy would replace a current Board policy, “School Board norms; protocols; violations,” and be replaced with “Aspirational statements; School Board norms; protocols; and consequences for violations,” including protocols “for obtaining reports from the Office of the School Superintendent, handling information received from the Office of the School Board Attorney, responding to public comments during public meetings, interacting with employees of Suffolk Public Schools and visiting property of Suffolk Public Schools. All Board hearings regarding discipline of a member will take place in a closed meeting, unless at least three members vote to do it during a public meeting.

An unconstitutional policy in Greene County, Virginia prohibits government employees from talking to the press and requires them to label anything they share with the press as “opinion” even if it’s verifiable fact. Apparently the Chairman of the County Board of Supervisors, Steve Catalano, believes he has a monopoly on facts. Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) and the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) led a letter from a coalition of press freedom and transparency organizations urging Catalano to rethink the policy. As the letter explains, similar policies have repeatedly been struck down as violating government employees’ constitutional right to speak about matters of public concern. FPF Advocacy Director Seth Stern said “A free press covering county government must be able to talk to experts with firsthand knowledge and get facts, not PR. Courts regularly reject policies requiring media inquiries to be routed to designated “Public Information Officers.” And they would have rejected policies compelling people to label their speech as “opinion” if anyone had tried it before. That requirement is not only unconstitutional but entirely absurd.” Caroline Hendrie, Executive Director of SPJ, added: “Members of the public deserve timely and honest answers from their government, and journalists need access to public servants who know what they’re talking about. When agencies and officials impose unconstitutional gag rules, they disrupt the flow of information that people need to make decisions about their communities and their lives.”

When the Connecticut legislature adjourned sine die as the clock struck midnight on June 4, the majority of the session’s bills affecting the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) died on the chamber calendars. Several frequent flyer bills that have appeared in previous legislative sessions once again failed to clear session hurdles and reach final passage. These include a bill that would exempt most public records produced by public universities from FOIA disclosure and several bills that would have expanded the number of public employees whose residential addresses are exempt from disclosure. A controversial measure in a police accountability bill, which would have prohibited the disclosures of police officers unless they had been investigated or adjudicated, also failed to pass both chambers. A bill implementing largely technical corrections recommended by the Freedom of Information Commission (FOIC), which has appeared in several previous legislative sessions, also failed to pass both chambers, as did a proposal by Sen. Rob Sampson, R-Wolcott, that would have required a study of public agencies’ response times to FOIA requests.