The Portland teachers union wants a say in what information about teachers Oregon's largest school district can share with the public.

Details of the Portland teachers contract became public this week ahead of the board's Thursday vote to ratify the agreement. The contract gives the union the right to bargain new conditions on public records once the board approves a new records policy. Board members are at work on a policy they've said is intended to give the public more and speedier access to school district information.

The teachers union, which has gone more than two years without a contract, has called for a more transparent district. Portland Association of Teachers President Suzanne Cohen wrote in a note to members at the beginning of last year that she hoped that soon "our district can finally be restructured into a more clear and transparent system."

Still, it appears the union would like to see limits on how transparent the district can be when information concerns teachers.

The union's concerns about what the district makes public slowed the release of some records last fall.

In fall 2017, Public Records Officer Ryan Vandehey said he would delay releasing the district's 2012 settlement agreement with former teacher Norm Scott. Scott retired from a 36-year teaching career in Portland under a cloud, but went on to substitute teach in other nearby districts. In that role, he sexually touched six girls in Oregon City in just one day. After Scott was criminally convicted for these actions in October, The Oregonian/OregonLive requested to see his settlement agreement with the district.

Vandehey said the district had to consult with the union before the record could be made public because of the union's desire to bargain over the new public records policy.

As it turned out, the settlement agreement was already publicly available in court filings, and the terms of that agreement worried school board members. That document showed the school district struck a deal with Scott to keep quiet about his history of conduct with students that drew complaints and prompted his supervisors to warn him to stop.

Per the agreement, district officials were to say only the dates Scott worked, positions held and that he retired. According to the retirement agreement, Scott was to say only that he retired "after taking a short leave of absence," and not mention any details about his agreement or what led up to it.

Scott had been told in writing to not text students or give them personal gifts.

The agreement also said that, "with regard to the current inquiry into an allegation of misconduct — an allegation that Mr. Scott refutes — the district will seal all investigative materials mentioning such investigation...the district acknowledges that no formal investigation findings or recommendations were reached and no discipline issued."

The terms of that agreement are now the subject of an inquiry by a team of investigators the school board hired. The board launched the investigation in response to an August 2017 news story by The Oregonian/OregonLive, which revealed how the district had helped a different educator — Mitch Whitehurst — evade allegations of sexual misconduct for years.

That inquiry has been ongoing for months. Last week, board members specifically asked investigators to look at the agreement to shield Scott's history from other districts.

"Upon review of the district's practices and actions, we have concerns with how Scott's employment termination was handled," said a memo board leaders sent to the investigators.

Cohen, the union president, has said her group won't comment on anything related to the Whitehurst matter. The union's website posted this statement after The Oregonian/OregonLive published its story on Whitehurst:

"We will continue to defend everyone's right to due process, and to fulfill our duty to fairly represent our members. No one should have their professional reputation ruined by unsubstantiated rumors or be tried in the press where they are assumed guilty until proven innocent. We continue to demand that the district do its job of investigating complaints and taking appropriate actions, while adhering to core legal principles like due process and innocent until proven guilty."

The importance of a new public records policy follows a significant shift on Portland's school board last summer when three members of the seven-member panel changed. Oregon's largest school district has undermined the public's trust in it in recent years, and pledges of transparency have been a critical part of district leaders' promises that better days are ahead.

The catalyst for this reckoning was a 2016 lead in drinking water scandal. District officials repeatedly and insistently blew off parent concerns about lead in school water. Worse, when officials finally tested the water, they withheld worrisome test results and were slow to act to fix them. Further testing revealed almost every single school in the district had a lead problem.

Since the scandal, more people have used Oregon's public records law to learn about Portland Public Schools. These laws, which exist in every state, aim to allow people to stay informed and hold their government accountable.

A September update on the policy included a bulleted list of "major issues addressed in the policy." This listed included: the creation of an overall philosophy to assume records are public and to apply exemptions with a goal of maximum transparency, guidelines on how to apply exemptions and fees, how the district will process and prioritize its responses, how people can appeal decisions and the board's role in public records requests.

The update also said the district aimed to have a new policy by the end of October 2017, which did not happen.

— Bethany Barnes

Got a tip about Portland Public Schools? Email Bethany: bbarnes@oregonian.com