FOI Fight in East Windsor Ends With “Admonishment” For Town Officials

The Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission (FOIC) determined that the Town of East Windsor violated the state’s Freedom of Information Act when it failed to provide documents pursuant to a FOI request that were publicly available through the town’s website and town officials’ social media pages and some records that had been withheld or redacted.

The FOIC also amended the decision with an admonishment over how the town handled the request, namely seeking to charge $20 per visit for the requester to view the documents and claiming the request was “vexatious,” according to the FOIC’s recording of the hearing. Vexatious means the requestor is abusing the state’s FOI laws or trying to interfere with an agency. 

The complaint filed by Lynne Stanley of East Windsor sought all documents related to the costs and planning of the redevelopment of Scout Hall from a youth center to a multi-purpose facility, including a senior center. The project, which was put to a referendum vote twice, was controversial in town, with the first referendum vote in 2022 narrowly failing and the second vote in May of 2023 passing by a wide margin.

Stanley filed her request in November of 2022 and filed her complaint with the FOIC in January of 2024. The town and East Windsor First Selectman Jason Bowza pushed back against the request claiming it was “vexatious,” and publicly named and chided Stanley during a Board of Selectmen meeting in April during which Bowza stacked 1,400 pages of documents on a table and said it cost $10,000 in legal costs to put them all together.

Stanley maintained that some of the documents had been withheld or improperly redacted. The FOIC found that some of those documents should have been disclosed to Stanley, while others constituted attorney-client privilege and drafts, which are not subject to FOI laws, after the FOIC viewed the records in camera, or privately.

According to the FOIC decision, “the town attorney testified that the in camera records… relate to a highly contested and controversial project in the Town of East Windsor that would be going out to bid, if approved. The town attorney also testified that the disclosure of such records, which were incomplete and subject to change, would have negatively impacted bidding, and harmed the progress and scope of the project.”

The FOIC also found the town responded promptly to the request, which took four months, because Stanley did not inform the town of “the importance of the records, nor a specific timeframe by when she needed the records,” according to the decision. All the records were compiled and reviewed by the town attorney because the town believed Stanley was taking a “litigious” approach, which added to the time.

During the FOIC hearing, Stanley’s attorney, Kieth Yagaloff, who was recently elected to the East Windsor Board of Selectman, commented that he believed the municipality was favored in the process.

“The process endured by Ms. Stanley was not only burdensome, requiring her attendance over several days of hearings, at it seems to have favored the interest of the municipality,” Yagaloff said to the FOIC. “I think things are slipping a little bit in terms of watchdog agencies in general and the tendency to favor the municipality.”

The FOIC indicated that the burden of proof falls on the municipality or government to prove that documents must be withheld. The hearing officer indicated there were four lengthy hearings in the matter and indicated that she did find certain violations.

However, FOIC members commented that the town should be “admonished” for proposing to charge Stanley $20 per visit to look at the records, which never actually occurred. “They didn’t do that, but they set it forth in a letter, which means it’s their practice,” FOIC Chairman Owen Eagan said. “It offended me.”

“What are they doing to the next person? I want them to know that that’s not right,” Eagan continued.

“Also, I think they have a hair-trigger on the term ‘vexatious,’” said Commissioner Christopher Hankins. “Asking for documents, it may be lengthy or burdensome, but it’s not vexatious and I think they have a hair-trigger throwing around the term vexatious. Maybe they want to back off that term.”

The board indicated they would include those comments in footnotes to their decision and questioned whether additional FOI training was necessary for East Windsor.

Previous FOI hearings revealed that East Windsor went into the November 2022 referendum without a written estimate for the Scout Hall redevelopment, which was pegged at between $4.7 and $5 million. The town later received a written estimate ahead of the second referendum vote in May, which passed. The town was also found to have violated state election laws in using the town’s phone alert system to push for an affirmative vote on the project.

“I think the system is broken for many people like me,” Stanley said to the FOIC, adding that she’s had to take time off work and pay for an attorney. “Individuals should be able to ask for information from their government without having to reach out to the state FOIA Commission.”

“I’ve lived in town for 26 years and I’ve only asked twice for information, and I never thought when I asked the first selectman for information that it would come to this,” Stanley continued. “I’m just very disappointed that it had to come to this and like I said, many people would’ve just walked away. This has been very difficult.”