253 A.3d 820
Pa. Commw. Ct.2021Background
- Feb. 2016: Fox 43 (Valerie Hawkins) requested a school-bus surveillance video capturing a physical encounter involving a Central Dauphin student and a parent under the RTKL.
- Central Dauphin withheld the video, citing FERPA and the RTKL exemption for records whose disclosure "would result in the loss of Federal or State funds" (§708(b)(1)(i)).
- OOR ordered release; trial court affirmed, finding the video was not an "education record" under FERPA. This Court initially affirmed; the Pennsylvania Supreme Court vacated and remanded in light of Easton II.
- On remand this Court applied Easton II, concluded the bus video is an "education record" (video was used for investigation/discipline and was maintained by the district).
- The School District failed to prove FERPA would cause loss of federal funds (no evidence of a policy or practice of wrongful disclosures); Court held FERPA permits release of de-identified records.
- Court ordered release of the video after redacting all students' personally identifiable information; remanded with instructions to redact before disclosure.
Issues
| Issue | Hawkins' Argument | Central Dauphin's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the bus video is an "education record" under FERPA | Video is not an education record; not directly related or maintained as a student file | Video is an education record because it was used in investigation/discipline and is maintained by the district | Video is an education record: directly related (used for official purposes) and maintained by the district (per Easton II) |
| Whether disclosure would cause loss of federal funds under RTKL §708(b)(1)(i) | Disclosure will not cause loss of funds; district must prove loss and policy/practice | Disclosure would violate FERPA and subject district to funding loss | District failed to prove a policy/practice of improper disclosures or actual loss; exemption not met |
| Whether FERPA/other federal law exempts the video under RTKL §§102/305(a)(3) | Even if an education record, FERPA allows release if personally identifiable info is removed | FERPA bars disclosure; redaction ineffective or impossible (identity already public; district lacks redaction tech) | FERPA does not bar a redacted release; removal of PII renders video releasable; public-identification argument does not preclude redaction |
| Whether redaction is required and feasible | Redaction is feasible and satisfies FERPA | Redaction infeasible or futile; district lacks capability | Court requires redaction; district did not prove inability to redact and trial court correctly found redaction "not impossible" |
Key Cases Cited
- Easton Area School Dist. v. Miller, 232 A.3d 716 (Pa. 2020) (FERPA may classify a school-bus video as an education record but allows redacted release; loss-of-funds exemption requires proof of policy/practice)
- Easton Area School Dist. v. Miller, 191 A.3d 75 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2018) (Commonwealth Court panel opinion addressing video’s relation to students vs. staff performance)
- Pennsylvania State Education Ass'n v. Commonwealth Dep't of Community & Economic Dev., 148 A.3d 142 (Pa. 2016) (requires balancing students’ privacy interests against public interest)
- Evans v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, 951 F.3d 578 (D.C. Cir. 2020) (segregability/redaction of video evidence is generally feasible; agency must explain infeasibility)