Wilton Teachers Union Calls District’s Proposed New Communications Policy Unconstitutional; BOE Delays Vote

Likely approval of a proposed new Wilton Public Schools district policy regarding employee use of computer systems, networks and electronic communications was tabled Thursday night, May 1, after the president of the teachers’ union told the Board of Education it was unconstitutional.

Addressing the BOE in public comment, Peggy Meurer, president of the Wilton Education Association, said Policy 4118.5, “Employee Use of the District’s Computer Systems and Electronic Communications” violated the rights of teachers.

“This policy is unconstitutional … This policy cannot be passed. It directly violates the 4th and 14th Amendment rights,” Meurer said.

In short, the policy allows the district to access not only any use of school computers, but any personal devices — such as a private cellphone — that may be accessing the school’s computer network, including Internet access.

“The system administrator and others managing the computer systems may access electronic messaging systems (including email) or monitor activity on the computer system or electronic devices accessing the computer systems at any time and for any reason or no reason,” the policy draft states.

System administrators can bypass passwords, review communications, and view any social networking that was done on a device in any way linked to the school’s network.

The policy further states, using bold-faced type, “Users should not have any expectation of personal privacy in the use of the computer system or other electronic devices that access the computer system.”

Meurer read a statement on behalf of the union that, in part, cited Supreme Court cases that she said show the unconstitutional nature of this policy.

“This policy … is extreme and invasive and should not be passed,” Meurer said.

“It is a violation of the Wilton Public Schools’ teachers’ and staff’s 4th Amendment rights to privacy as guaranteed to us through the due-process clause of the 14th Amendment,” she said, “and based on case law throughout our country cannot be considered as anything other than an infringement on … civil rights.”

“By passing this policy,” Meurer said, “the district would be attempting to set precedent that for no reason at all the district can access the most intimate details of their employee’s lives.”

She said that these included, but were not limited to, photographs, private communications with friends and family, all personal emails, and any documents stored on personal devices.

Per the law, Meurer said that employees were entitled to a “reasonable expectation of privacy,” which would extend to any computer content search being limited to a “reasonable” one in which “operational realities” had to be taken into account.

“The language of this policy directly contradicts reasonableness standards laid out by the Supreme Court of the United States,” Meurer said, because it codifies the system administrator and others’ unlimited option and ability to examine all computer activity for any reason, or for no reason at all.

Meurer pointed out that, since teachers were contractually guaranteed a 30-minute lunch period, they should have the freedom to be connected into the school’s computer network without the potential loss of privacy that the policy promises.

“Passing this policy would imply that staff were unable to use their personal devices even for that 30-minute lunch,” she said.

Meurer closed her comments by providing BOE members with copies of a memorandum from the National School Boards Association’s Council of School Attorneys regarding such policies, which she said supported her argument.

School administrators appeared surprised to hear Meurer’s comments but did not respond.

Sandwiched between four other BOE policies on the agenda that all received unanimous approval without discussion, when it came to this particular policy, BOE Chair Ruth DeLuca said she wanted to table it.

Superintendent Kevin Smith asked to make a comment.

“I don’t have any concerns about this policy,” Smith said. “It’s a recommended policy from our attorneys, so it’s, like, pretty standard.”

“I was surprised that we actually didn’t maintain it already,” he said. “But just in light of the comments, I’d be happy to go back and spend some more time and better understanding and have some more conversation.”

DeLuca concurred.

“I would echo your thoughts, as it came through the Policy Committee, but we’ll put it aside for now,” she said.