FOI bill would exempt campus threat talks

A bill backed by the University of Virginia would exempt all records generated by campus threat assessment teams from the state’s Freedom of Information Act.

UVa officials say the legislation is needed to allow the teams to openly discuss potential threats to campus safety. In addition to exempting the teams’ work from public information laws, the bill would also allow campus mental health providers and law enforcement officials to share confidential information.

Open government advocates, however, warn that the measure might make it difficult to hold public officials accountable and identify gaps in the system in the aftermath of violent incidents in the wake of the massacre at Virginia Tech in 2007.

Following the Tech slayings, all public colleges and universities in Virginia were mandated to establish cross-university threat assessment teams with representatives from student affairs, law enforcement, human resources, counseling services, residence life and others.

The teams convene to share information about students or university employees who might be deemed a threat. Their task is to identify potential threats and take the appropriate steps to prevent campus violence.

State and federal privacy laws already protect the vast majority of records that come before the threat assessment teams. These can include academic, personnel, criminal or mental health records.

Yet UVa wants to further exempt the minutes, notes and other records produced by threat assessment teams.

Del. Rob Bell, R-Albemarle County, and Sen. John S. Edwards, D-Roanoke, are carrying identical versions of the bill in the General Assembly.

Bell cites Tech shootings

Bell said the Freedom of Information Act exemption is needed to allow threat assessment team members to have an open dialogue about possible threats without worrying that their conversations might be aired in public.

“They need to be able to discuss mental health records, medical records, criminal records and assessments of the students without the thought that the student newspaper is going to publish their discussions every week,” Bell said.

Bell pointed out that law enforcement agencies already keep private most records related to ongoing criminal investigations. Threat assessment team documents, he said, should similarly be kept out of the public’s eye.

In the case of another campus tragedy like the Virginia Tech shootings, investigators would still be able to go over the records and ensure that officials are held accountable and that any needed reforms are identified.

After the Virginia Tech massacre, Bell noted, a review panel appointed by then Gov. Timothy M. Kaine was permitted to examine confidential academic and mental health records related to killer Seung-Hui Cho. A similar panel convened after any future tragedies, Bell said, would still be able to examine any relevant records.

Critics: Bill ‘overbroad’

The Virginia Press Association does not oppose the idea of excluding threat assessment teams from the state’s Freedom of Information laws, but the association does oppose the bill introduced by Bell and Edwards because the legislation’s language is overly broad, wrote VPA lawyer Craig T. Merritt in a letter sent to Bell, Edwards and other key lawmakers.

“VPA opposes these bills because the proposed exclusion is overbroad,” he wrote. “As proposed, the entire investigative and deliberative process of a threat assessment team is closed forever in all cases under all circumstances. VPA’s concern is that, despite the best efforts of threat assessment teams, there will inevitably be occasions where a person under assessment will commit a crime involving serious harm to another person. In those cases, it will be important for the public, after the fact, to evaluate the effectiveness of the threat assessment team in addressing that particular case.”

Merritt proposed added language to the measure that would permit the release of threat assessment team records pertaining to university students or employees who commit an act that causes the death or serious bodily harm, including any sexual assault chargeable as a felony. Merritt also proposed that these records be available for five years after the student is no longer enrolled or the employee stops working at the university.

Megan Rhyne, executive director of the Virginia Coalition for Open Government, said that whenever a major incident occurs — such as the attempted Christmas plane bombing or the Fort Hood shootings — it is necessary for the public to examine what went wrong.

“We don’t want to see a blanket exemption for all of the threat assessment team’s records,” she said. “Should something happen again, you should be able to look at these records.”

Privacy concerns

Susan Davis, UVa’s assistant vice president for student affairs and liaison to the general counsel, said that if another tragedy similar to the Virginia Tech massacre occurred, the new legislation would not prevent the relevant records from coming to light.

“I do believe that in a tragedy of that magnitude, these records are going to be released one way or another,” she said.

Davis said the FOIA exemption is necessary to allow the teams to openly and honestly discuss students and employees who might be dangerous to themselves or others.

“The hard thing right now is to get people to feel good about reporting stuff,” she said. “We don’t want to have a chilling effect.”

In most cases, she said, threat assessment teams discuss students who are far from the extreme case of Virginia Tech.

“There is some public right-to-know when you cross the line to a Virginia Tech-type scenario. It can be tricky to know where that line is, though,” she said. “The vast majority of these people are not like Cho. The vast majority of these people are a threat only to themselves. We don’t want them to be outed.”

The bill’s other provisions are similarly important, she said. One part would allow campus mental health providers to share their assessment of a student with the threat assessment team. Currently, therapists may share their views and details of a student’s treatment only if the student signs a release form.

Law enforcement officers, meanwhile, are currently prohibited from sharing certain key information with the threat assessment team. Officers, Davis said, cannot run a student or employee through a criminal database and then share their findings with the team. They also cannot tell the teams information such as whether the student or employee recently purchased a gun. The proposed legislation, she said, would close these loopholes.