w.ww.ethics.state.ms.us/ethics/ethics.nsf/PageSection/A_records_R-08-009/$FILE/08009.pdf?OpenElement
Readers can now digest Ole Miss's response to my complaint since they are now brought up to speed on this little skirmish. The response stated:
UM believes that the public interest is best served by releasing the names of boosters listed in the 2016 Notice of Allegations ("2016 NOA") and the 2017 Amended Notice of Allegations ("2017 NOA"). As such, UM's position is that it wants to release versions of the above referenced documents, along with UM's responses, with only the names and personally identifiable information related to student athletes redacted. However, issues related to the privacy interests of boosters whose names appear in those documents have yet to be fully litigated. Currently, issues related to the privacy interests of boosters in the context of the Mississippi Public Records Act are pending before the MEC.
On June 2, 2017, the MEC issued a Preliminary Report and Recommendation ("PRR") in the pending matter. The PRR recommended that the 2016 NOA and the 2017 NOA "involve matters of legitimate public concern which outweigh any right to privacy, if any, which extends to the boosters who are alleged to have been involved in NCAA rules infractions." Although UM does not contest the result recommended in the PRR, the PRR allowed another party to intervene to provide a written response to the PRR for the MEC to consider. Accordingly, the MEC has not yet had an opportunity to address the concerns raised by the intervener or issue a Final Order accepting, rejecting or modifying the PRR. Thus, considering the "legitimate"16 and "tangible concerns" related to UM's
potential tort liability, it would be premature for UM to release the documents requested.... will revisit the disclosure of involved third parties after receiving more direction from the MEC. According to the MEC' s website, the commission's next meeting is set for July 14, 2017.18
So Ole Miss says it would like to provide the records but the Commission just happened to allow another party to present an argument over redacting the names and the university really doesn't want to get in the way of the Commission.
Stay tuned. Don't touch that mouse. (copied excerpt from the article below)
http://kingfish1935.blogspot.com/201...-names-of.html