FREEDOM CORNER: Email Disclosures Upset Some Town Officials; Freedom of Information Commission Provides Clarifications
Following the publication of a number of email addresses for various Town Officials in The Goshen News 10th Edition, some town officials have spoken out to object to those disclosures.
“I have concerns, being on a commission, we’re not supposed to talk about applicants outside of commission meetings” said Lorraine Lucas, an Inland Wetlands Commission member, at the January 23rd Board of Selectmen meeting. “That encourages people to call individual commissioners to talk about different applications and we’re not supposed to do that”, she said.
1st Selectman Carusillo responded: “The Goshen News posted those emails, they asked for all the elected officials from me, and some board members, they wanted their names out there, they were supplied some names.” He went on to acknowledge that some people’s information was withheld from The Goshen News because they didn’t give their permission.
The Goshen News did not undertake these disclosures capriciously or carelessly. We have repeatedly reached out to the State Freedom of Information Commission (FOIC) for guidance on the question of what constitutes public information that can be published, and we have followed that guidance. The Freedom of Information Act is intended to promote transparency and accountability in government, and it is the traditional role of the Press to champion those same values. The ability of townspeople to have their voices heard by their elected and appointed officials is arguably essential to having open, accountable, representative government. There are, certainly, limitations on what members of certain commissions can do outside of their public meetings, but the extent of those limitations may be misunderstood by some.
In the interest of obtaining further clarification, The Goshen News recently reached back out to the FOIC. We spoke with Russell Blair, Director of Education & Communications for the Freedom of Information Commission in Hartford, and specifically asked:
“Are email addresses (accounts) and their contents, attachments, replies, etc., used in the course of Town business subject to FOIA disclosure. Can anyone have access to them?”
Response: “Any emails sent regarding town business are public records and would need to be provided via an FOI request unless the Town believed there was a specific exemption in play, such as emails protected by attorney-client privilege, for example. The email addresses of the senders should not be redacted.”
Accordingly, the email addresses published by The Goshen News were public information, and their disclosure would be required upon FOI request, as are all other email addresses used by all town officials for town business. No special permissions are required, and the Town should not withhold them. While some town officials continue to use their personal email accounts to conduct town business, doing so puts them at risk of having all their personal communications becoming public, in the event of a potential legal action.
Having confirmed that the email addresses themselves are public information, we turned to the question of how they can be used. We asked: “Does the electorate have the right to speak, write, email to their town officials, (elected or appointed) at any time, on any subject?”
Response: “There is nothing in the FOI Act that would prohibit citizens from emailing their town officials.”
As The Goshen News is aware that some commissions, including Planning & Zoning and Inland Wetlands, are restricted from certain specific types of discussions outside of their meetings, we further asked: “What are the exceptions that prevent the same town elected or appointed officials from speaking with their constituency. Please be specific.”
Response: “Again, there is nothing in the FOI Act that prohibits elected or appointed officials from communicating with citizens. The key thing that needs to be avoided is having those communications turn into a discussion among a quorum of the board or commission about what kind of action they may take based on the citizen’s concerns. For example, if someone emails the entire board of selectmen complaining about potholes, you do not want the entire board to begin responding to that email and discussing the road repair budget.”
Accordingly, having established that townspeople have the right to email their elected officials, we next asked: “How should these town agencies (boards, commissions, committees, etc.) handle written correspondence (including emails)?”
Response: “There are a few ways agencies can handle emails from citizens. They could elect to have the chairperson of the board respond on behalf of the entire board directly to the individual, copying fellow board members to keep them up to speed on the situation, provided the discussion does not continue beyond the chairperson’s message. Alternatively, they could read the communication at a subsequent board meeting that has been properly noticed according to the FOIA and have a thorough discussion and take any action necessary.”
Having established that there are appropriate ways for townspeople to communicate with their town officials, and that there are appropriate ways for those officials to respond, we turned to a question regarding commission members’ communication with each other.
During the January Planning & Zoning Commission meeting, in the course of discussion of a variance application that will be the subject of a hearing on February 27th, one of the commissioners asked the Town Planner if it was permissible for commissioners to go and take a look at the property. “It’s not a meeting if you go by yourself,” he responded. The issue is that commission business should not be conducted outside of a meeting, in what is known as “ex-parte” discussions.
So we asked the FOIC: In a commission of five members, does it constitute an ex-parte violation, if two of those members jointly view an applicant's property?
Response: Because the two members do not constitute a quorum of the board, it would not be considered to be a meeting under FOI and there would not be any potential FOI violation.
The Goshen News has been advised by the 1st Selectman that additional town officials have recently stepped forward to ask that their contact information be provided to The Goshen News for publication. We await their receipt.
The Goshen News also provided the 1st Selectman with a copy of the Freedom of Information Commission email, in which the above questions were asked and answered. He told us he would distribute it to all elected and appointed town officials. We have yet to receive confirmation of that action.
