PNG Coaching Search/Hire Discussion- (New Threads Will Be Deleted)

[Guest JoesBros]

Trust me, I never said it was important.

That huge offensive line helped to!

[pngfan1]

I would also say Dustin benefited from having great WRs at the time too and a darn good running game.

He had 4 darn good recievers, and a tailback that caught the ball out of the backfield well. I think its fair to say they complimented each other. That team had more speed than usual.

[Guest JoesBros]

It just aggravates me when people say PNG was good just because of him.

[jackhammer]

PNG was good BECASUE OF DUSTIN LONG.......WHAT HAVE THEY DONE SINCE THEN............

What a bunch of crap. PNG wasnt good just because of Dustin Long. In 1999 that was just a good all around football team. They made it to the playoffs 4 or 5 out of the last eight seasons. I know Dustin was a great player but people need to stop saying they were good just because of him geezz people.

You're saying they could have got to the state championship with their backup as their starter?  Long was the cog in the wheel.  It wasn't anybody else.  He did have a good "supporting" cast to form their excellent TEAM.  But, they were good because of DUSTIN LONG.  You sound jealous of Dustin Long's reputation.  Don't be a hater.  8)

[KDOSullivan]

Actually, you don't get it.  What is wrong with what the school board is doing.  A FOI was sent and they have ten days to release.  In that time they can send an appeal to the AG that could take 45 days for the answer.  Until the AG tells them they have to release it, then they don't.  This type of practice is done every day in courtrooms around the country.  You plead your case until you no longer can.  In the end, if the AG tells them they have to release it, then by all means, they should.  And if they don't, then start complaining.  I will be right there with you.

\

Yes, I Get it, you want to skirt the law. If it was a physics teacher list, PNG would turn it over in a heart-beat.

I got hired at PNG this year and nobody filed an FOI for the list of applicants for my position or my salary. 

Would you like for me to do it? I can find out stuff that you probably don't want me to know....Just like you could find out about me...

[Guest JoesBros]

Im not a hater on Dustin and Im not jealous of him either. He had some darn good recievers, a heck of a running back in Bo Wortham,and that offensive line was just massive. Was he talented? Yes he was and probably in the top 3 of all time from this area. I just dont think the rest of the guys got enough spotlight because of him.

[stevieray]

I think the admin is wasting time...Get the interviews over with and hire the new coach so he can get his staff filled...He has a lot of work to get done (Implement his offseason, teach his offensive and defensive systems, spring football, etc...)

If they know who they want, go out and get him!  Make him an offer he can't refuse....Time is ticking and the ones suffering are the student/athletes

[stevieray]

Dustin was a great player, but not the only stud in the stable...They gave Stephenville all we wanted and more and I was thoroughly impressed with their defense (held us to 28 points)

[stevieray]

PNG was good BECASUE OF DUSTIN LONG.......WHAT HAVE THEY DONE SINCE THEN............

What a bunch of crap. PNG wasnt good just because of Dustin Long. In 1999 that was just a good all around football team. They made it to the playoffs 4 or 5 out of the last eight seasons. I know Dustin was a great player but people need to stop saying they were good just because of him geezz people.

You're saying they could have got to the state championship with their backup as their starter?   Long was the cog in the wheel.  It wasn't anybody else.  He did have a good "supporting" cast to form their excellent TEAM.  But, they were good because of DUSTIN LONG.  You sound jealous of Dustin Long's reputation.  Don't be a hater.   8)

I don't know the answer to that, but I do know that we won 4 state championships with 4 different QB's....and 2 of the 4 were backup QB's the year before when we won it all.

Glenn O'Dell backed up Branndon Stewart in 1993 and then won it as a starter in 1994

Kendal Briles backed up Kelan Luker in 1998 and then won it as a starter in 1999

[prepballfan]

I think the admin is wasting time...Get the interviews over with and hire the new coach so he can get his staff filled...He has a lot of work to get done (Implement his offseason, teach his offensive and defensive systems, spring football, etc...)

If they know who they want, go out and get him!  Make him an offer he can't refuse....Time is ticking and the ones suffering are the student/athletes

Well said

[Cardinal Supporter]

If you do not live in the school district then it is not your tax dollars that is paying these people. I think everyone that is crying "Its the Law" is worrying about the wrong thing. The board is doing what, in their opinion, is best for the school, team, and community. Let them do their work.

[Cardinal Supporter]

I live in Bridge City and I support our coach. I think he is the man for the job right now. If we were in the hunt for a new coach then I would want our board to do exactly what PNG's board is doing which is trying to get the best coach they can possibly get. And if it means to keep the list of candidates confidential then so be it.

[Guest L212]

If you do not live in the school district then it is not your tax dollars that is paying these people. I think everyone that is crying "Its the Law" is worrying about the wrong thing. The board is doing what, in their opinion, is best for the school, team, and community. Let them do their work.

Cardinal Supporter,

You seem to be implying that no one should care whether or not PNG's school board is abiding by the law because they are doing what they think is best.  Is this really what you meant to say?

[The Young Coach]

If you do not live in the school district then it is not your tax dollars that is paying these people. I think everyone that is crying "Its the Law" is worrying about the wrong thing. The board is doing what, in their opinion, is best for the school, team, and community. Let them do their work.

Cardinal Supporter,

You seem to be implying that no one should care whether or not PNG's school board is abiding by the law because they are doing what they think is best.  Is this really what you meant to say?

PNG is abiding by the law.  Please explain to us how they aren't.

[akifan94]

If you do not live in the school district then it is not your tax dollars that is paying these people. I think everyone that is crying "Its the Law" is worrying about the wrong thing. The board is doing what, in their opinion, is best for the school, team, and community. Let them do their work.

Cardinal Supporter,

You seem to be implying that no one should care whether or not PNG's school board is abiding by the law because they are doing what they think is best.  Is this really what you meant to say?

PNG is abiding by the law.  Please explain to us how they aren't.

You are asking people to answer a question they can't.

[Spider79]

If you do not live in the school district then it is not your tax dollars that is paying these people. I think everyone that is crying "Its the Law" is worrying about the wrong thing. The board is doing what, in their opinion, is best for the school, team, and community. Let them do their work.

Cardinal Supporter,

You seem to be implying that no one should care whether or not PNG's school board is abiding by the law because they are doing what they think is best.  Is this really what you meant to say?

PNG is abiding by the law.  Please explain to us how they aren't.

You are asking people to answer a question they can't.

The logical conclusion would be....don't make the statement!

[NDNWarrior]

PNG is doing the right thing.  All this say that they are holding out for one particular applicant is a bunch of hogwash!  PNG will give each applicant a level playing field and choose the right guy.  I will be glad when we have a new HC/AD so we can get ready for next year.  The new RESERVATION is beautiful, and next year is going to be GREAT!  If you get a chance, go by and look at the stadium...that alone will get your blood pumping!  I think we all should "lay off" and let the board/committee fulfill what they were set out to do.

PNG>>>>>>>>>>>>>>HONOR..........PRIDE.........TRADITION !

[Cardinal Supporter]

I'm not sure they aren't abiding by the law as is being said. PNG evidently has a particular coach in mind and they are trying to obtain their objective. If they aren't abiding by the law then I'm sure the appropriate entity will intervein. I just think that they are persuing all their options. What is it that everyone wants? PNG to take the first coach that comes along even if he is not the one they really want. If the one they are after does not make himself available then they will have to take the best that applied. All the proding in the world will not chance the outcome. Is this because it is PNG that some are so concerned about? I know some will still shout "But it's the law". If this were Sabine Pass would there be so much fuss? I don't have a dog in this fight. I do not think that PNG or anyother school is better than Sabine Pass or anybody else. I just think that PNG or whoever is trying to hire a HC/AD should be able to go after the best they can get. I guess if they did publish the list and did not hire anyone from it people would then want to accuse them of thinking they are better than anybody that applied. I don't really care who they hire. I just read these post and picked a side that I think is fair. JMO

[NDNWarrior]

Good Post, Cardinal Supporter.  Wish everyone had your perspective!

[kvillefan1992]

Wasnt this suppose to be a thread about LCM AD/HC???????? Just curious since the last 3 pages have been nothing but about PNG. We are ALLLLL sick of hearing about PNG. Go to your own thread!!!! You have several to choose from. I dont think anyone will get fired for applying, they may feel some tension, but not fired!!! jmo

[Guest thefan]

Wat coach wud want to go to PN-G as much as they are fussing about it

[smitty]

Hogwash?  Are you sure?

PNG is doing the right thing.  All this say that they are holding out for one particular applicant is a bunch of hogwash!  PNG will give each applicant a level playing field and choose the right guy.  I will be glad when we have a new HC/AD so we can get ready for next year.  The new RESERVATION is beautiful, and next year is going to be GREAT!  If you get a chance, go by and look at the stadium...that alone will get your blood pumping!  I think we all should "lay off" and let the board/committee fulfill what they were set out to do.

PNG>>>>>>>>>>>>>>HONOR..........PRIDE.........TRADITION !

[stevieray]

Quick question...If PNG hires a coach this weekend, do they still have to release the list of applicants?

[johnbfree]

See the following below:

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

GREG ABBOTT

January 21, 2009

Mr. Rusty Brittain

President

Port Neches-Groves Independent School District

620 Avenue C

Port Neches, Texas 77651

OR2009-00859

Dear Mr. Brittian:

You ask whether certain information is subject to required public disclosure under the Public Information Act (the "Act"), chapter 552 of the Government Code. Your request was assigned ID# 337913.

The Port Neches-Grove Independent School District (the "district") received six requests from different requestors for information regarding the applicants for the head coach/athletic director position. You claim that the submitted information is excepted from disclosure under sections 552.102, 552.117, and 552.126 of the Government Code. We have considered the exceptions you claim and reviewed the information you have submitted. We have also received and considered comments submitted by two of the requestors. See Gov't Code § 552.304 (providing that any person may submit comments stating why information should or should not be released).

Section 552.102 of the Government Code excepts from disclosure "information in a personnel file, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Gov't Code § 552.102(a). In Hubert v. Harte-Hanks Texas Newspapers, the court ruled that the test to be applied to information claimed to be protected under section 552.102 is the same as the test formulated by the Texas Supreme Court in Industrial Foundation v. Texas Industrial Accident Board for information claimed to be protected under the doctrine of common-law privacy as incorporated by section 552.101 of the Act. See Hubert v. Harte-Hanks Tex. Newspapers, 652 S.W.2d 546, 550 (Tex. App.--Austin 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (citing Indus. Found. v. Texas Indus. Accident Bd., 540 S.W.2d 668, 685 (Tex. 1976). Accordingly, we will consider your common-law privacy claim under both sections 552.101 and 552.102 of the Government Code.

Common-law privacy protects information if (1) the information contains highly intimate or embarrassing facts the publication of which would be highly objectionable to a reasonable person, and (2) the information is not of legitimate concern to the public. Indus. Found., 540 S.W.2d at 685. The types of information considered intimate and embarrassing by the Texas Supreme Court in Industrial Foundation included information relating to sexual assault, pregnancy, mental or physical abuse in the workplace, illegitimate children, psychiatric treatment of mental disorders, attempted suicide, and injuries to sexual organs. Id. at 683. This office has found that information pertaining to the qualifications of an applicant for public employment is generally of legitimate public interest. See Open Records Decision Nos. 470 at 4 (1987) (public has legitimate interest in having access to information concerning performances of governmental employees), 444 (1986) (employee information about qualifications, disciplinary action and background not protected by privacy), 423 at 2 (1984) (scope of public employee privacy is narrow). Further, this office has found that the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of members of the public are not excepted from required public disclosure under common-law privacy. See Open Records Decision No. 455 (1987) (absent special circumstances, the home addresses and telephone numbers of private citizens are generally not protected under the Act's privacy exceptions). The information you seek to withhold consist of information pertaining to applicants of the district, including names, hometowns, number of years of experience, and current employers. Upon review, we find you have failed to explain how any portion of the submitted information constitutes highly intimate or embarrassing information that is not of legitimate public interest. Therefore, you may not withhold any portion of the submitted information pursuant to section 552.102 of the Government Code in conjunction with common-law privacy.

You claim the submitted information is subject to section 552.117. Section 552.117(a)(1) of the Government Code excepts from disclosure the current and former home addresses, telephone numbers, social security numbers, and family member information of current or former officials or employees of a governmental body who request that this information be kept confidential under section 552.024 of the Government Code. Gov't Code § 552.117(a)(1). Whether a particular piece of information is protected under section 552.117(a)(1) must be determined at the time the request for it is made. See Open Records Decision No. 530 at 5 (1989). We note that the protection of section 552.117 is applicable only to information that a governmental body holds in its capacity as an employer. See Gov't Code § 552.117 (providing that employees of governmental entities may protect certain personal information held by their employers); see also id. § 552.024 (establishing election process for Gov't Code § 552.117). Section 552.117(a)(1) only applies to current or former employees of the district and not applicants for employment or employees of governmental bodies other than the district. Open Records Decision No. 455 at 2 (1987). The information you have marked pertains to applicants of the district, rather than employees of the district. Therefore, the district may not withhold any portion of the submitted information under section 552.117(a)(1) of the Government Code.

Next, you claim section 552.126 for the submitted information. Section 552.126 of the Government Code excepts from disclosure the "name of an applicant for the position of superintendent of a public school district . . . except that the board of trustees must give public notice of the name or names of the finalists being considered for the position at least 21 days" before a vote or final action is taken. Gov't Code § 552.126. However, the applicants at issue seek a position as the head football coach/athletic director, not superintendent. You contend that because this is also a high profile position, it should be afforded the same protection. This office has determined that statutory confidentiality requires express language making the information at issue confidential. Open Records Decision No. 478 at 2 (1987); see also Open Records Decision No. 658 at 4 (1998) (statutory confidentiality must be express, and confidentiality requirement will not be implied from statutory structure). As the language of section 552.126 is expressly limited to applicants for the position of superintendent, section 552.126 is inapplicable to the submitted information and none of the information may be withheld on that basis. As you claim no other exceptions to disclosure of the submitted information, it must be released.

This letter ruling is limited to the particular information at issue in this request and limited to the facts as presented to us; therefore, this ruling must not be relied upon as a previous determination regarding any other information or any other circumstances.

This ruling triggers important deadlines regarding the rights and responsibilities of the governmental body and of the requestor. For more information concerning those rights and responsibilities, please visit our website at

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

or call the Office of the Attorney General's Open Government Hotline, toll free, at (877) 673-6839. Questions concerning the allowable charges for providing public information under the Act must be directed to the Cost Rules Administrator of the Office of the Attorney General at (512) 475-2497.

Sincerely,

Melanie J. Villars

Assistant Attorney General

Open Records Division

MJV/eeg

Ref: ID# 337913

Enc. Submitted documents

c: Requestor (7)

(w/o enclosures)

POST OFFICE BOX 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WEB: WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US

An Equal Employment Opportunity Employer

Home | ORLs

[akifan94]

Well, this is getting crazy. I will leave it at that.