More than a year after requesting detailed financial information from the Department of Education, the Education Institute of Hawaii has retained an attorney to obtain that data.

The law firm Cades Schutte on Thursday sent a letter to DOE Superintendent Christina Kishimoto requesting that the DOE agree by May 31 to release the requested information.

If it does not, the law firm intends to take the DOE to court.

“The message we’re hoping to send is that the DOE has had months to try to comply with what is clearly an appropriate and legal request to public documents,” said Jeff Portnoy, an attorney for Cades Schutte. “(EIH) has run into one roadblock and one excuse after another, and I guess they finally decided to come see us and see if we can help them.”

EIH, a nonprofit whose goal is to improve public education in Hawaii, initially sent the DOE a Uniform Information Practices Act request on March 6, 2018, for data to support a study that Ray L’Heureux, EIH’s chairman and president, said will lead to a report showing how the DOE spends its money, providing the state with “a decision- making tool” regarding the state’s education budget.

EIH requested information for every DOE position, including the position description, whether it is a full- or part-time position, salary amount and information regarding fringe benefits and pension payments.

One of the things L’Heureux said the study can reveal is whether there are any inequities in spending among schools.

The UIPA request was the start of an argument between the DOE and EIH over the request’s legality.

The DOE sent information to EIH, but the nonprofit said it did not send all the requested information. That resulted in a fight that has been going on for over a year and prompted EIH to start a petition to get that information and retain an attorney.

Kishimoto sent a letter May 7 to Stephen Terstegge, executive director of EIH, expressing her disappointment over the petition.

“We have been working with you and the Education Institute of Hawaii (“EIH”) in good faith and have provided you numerous data files with budget, revenue, expenditure, audit, weighted student formula and fiscal data to address your requests,” she said in the letter. “As we have stated before, we cannot provide the confidential types of data you are requesting, such as individual salaries, medical payments and other personally identifiable information.”

However, Portnoy said EIH is not asking for personal information, and even if there were instances in which released data could be used to identify DOE employees, those particular pieces of data could easily be removed.

Kishimoto also said EIH was demanding data from other DOE employees, looking to obtain data “based on the simple premise of getting a free product” and trying to “force its way ahead of the line by demanding data through threats of petition and confrontation.” She also said EIH must bid on the opportunity to work with the DOE in the capacity it wishes to, just as other interested parties are required to.

The Cades Schutte letter said the DOE was violating UIPA laws, indicated that it was looking to withhold all information from EIH and alleged that Kishimoto, by sending her May 7 letter to DOE employees, had issued a “gag order” to prohibit them from working with EIH.

The DOE declined to comment on the release of the Cades Schutte letter but said it stands by Kishimoto’s May 7 letter to EIH.