The days of a controversial South Whidbey School District policy to identify public records requesters online may be numbered.

The school board is set to discuss a slew of records related issues next week, including a recommendation from the district’s chief to drop the identification portion of the policy. While officials would continue to report the estimated cost of fulfilling records requests, along with a description of the information sought, the names of requestors would be replaced with either a number or a letter.

The meeting is scheduled for 6 p.m. Wednesday, March 25, at South Whidbey Elementary School.

In a recent interview with The Record, Superintendent Jo Moccia maintained that the intent of the policy has always been to keep the board informed about the financial resources being spent to satisfy information requests. Given that singular goal, there is simply no good answer to critics who have questioned how naming requesters helps keep school board directors educated about district expenditures, Moccia said. One doesn’t relate to the other, so she’s suggesting it be dropped.

Also, the policy has become an unnecessary headache, resulting in complaints from open government advocates, additional records requests and objections from parents who are threatening legal action for alleged breaches of student privacy laws, all of which have been covered in a series of newspaper stories. It’s taking away from her duties as superintendent.

“I’ve got important things that really need to be done, and this is distracting,” Moccia said.

In December, district officials began including in online school board agendas a specially created document that named requesters, the information they asked for, and the time and estimated cost of fulfilling the request. Officials claimed it was in response to rising legal fees associated with records requests.

The policy quickly came under fire, however, as a retaliatory measure against Eric Hood, a former teacher who has sued the district for alleged records violations and was subsequently labeled by school board members and officials as an abusive requester. He is blamed for racking up about $400,000 in legal fees.

Hood, who has declined requests for comment since January, released a statement this week noting a 2011 email in which Moccia committed to an environment of transparency and strict compliance with the state Open Public Records Act.

“Four years and hundreds of thousands of squandered dollars later, our school district leaders may yet learn to respect student privacy, be transparent, and act civilly, but only if compelled by law,” wrote Hood, in the statement.

Mark Helpenstell, a parent who claims the inclusion of his name and records request on the district’s online document was a violation of the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, said removing names is a step in the right direction. The district has already changed the description of his request to say only “student records.”

He contends, however, all the entries from 2014 should be removed entirely. The first document online listed requests over the past calendar year, but only one of Hood’s and those in December contained cost or time estimates. School officials say the inconsistency is because that information largely wasn’t being tracked until the document went live, but Helpenstell said that if financial information is all the district is interested in then the 2014 entries such as names should be removed.

“If you’re doing it to provide data, you haven’t done that,” Helpenstell said. “If you’re trying to embarrass people by publishing names and descriptions, then I’d say they’ve accomplished that goal.”

“Those records should be stricken entirely,” he said.

Director Linda Racicot, school board chairwoman, was aware of Moccia’s planned recommendation as she helps set the agenda; she meets with the superintendent and one other board member once a week. The idea, she said, was to come up with a solution to balance financial reporting and voiced concerns.

“I’m very hopeful we can make it a non-issue,” Racicot said.

Also on the agenda is whether or not to post online recordings of school board meetings, a measure Racicot supports, improvements to the district’s records request process and responding to media requests.