In his complaint against Kelley, Earley cites two state statutes he contended were violated by the release of the documents.

Those statutes were:

Section 1012.31(3)(a), which states: “The complaint and material relating to the investigation of a complaint against a public school employee are confidential until the preliminary investigation is either concluded or ceases to be active.”

Section 119.071(2)k, which states: “a complaint of misconduct filed with an agency against an agency employee and all information obtained pursuant to an investigation by the agency of the complaint is confidential and exempt until the investigation ceases to be active, or until the agency provides written notice to the employee who is the subject of the complaint” … that the investigation had been concluded and the employee has been either cleared or found at fault.

In a report filed Dec. 2, Pellegrino — who was paid $1,499.50, or approximately $90 an hour, to conduct the investigation commissioned by Superintendent Mary Beth Jackson — concurred with Earley that violations of Florida’s Sunshine Law had been committed.

“Earley’s allegation that Kelley violated Sections [1012.31] and 119.071 of the Florida Statutes appears to be correct,” Pellegrino reported. (In the formal copy of the report, the first statute was misidentified as 1017.31.)

“A memo outlining a timeline of events concerning the Stacie Smith complaint do show that the investigation of Earley’s complaint against Stacie Smith was still ongoing beyond 10/18/2017 when Kelley released it,” the report said. “Accordingly this complaint is considered to be confidential and exempt.”

The report noted Kelley had been disciplined for releasing the Smith complaint and accompanying emails to Saul before Pellegrino was even hired. Jackson sent a letter of reprimand on Nov. 9.

State statutes, though, provide for criminal sanctions for violations of the Sunshine Law. [READ MORE]