Again, Slattery is withholding public information
.JPG)
By Will Collette
Such a stunning contradiction in terms, Town Council Vice-President Deputy Dan Slattery (CCA) is. Here we have a guy who claims to be crusading for open and transparent government and who says – based on his own resolution – that he wants certain records released to the public.
More than two weeks ago, Slattery made a big show, first at the Town Council’s agenda meeting, and then at the horrific March 12 regularTown Council meeting, of castigating Charlestown
And, in a parallel attack on town administration of Ninigret Park, Deputy Dan also declared that based on two documents dating back to the town’s acquisition of Ninigret Park from the federal government, we have a moral, legal and ethical obligation to only do things in our park that the feds allow us to do.
He wanted two documents posted on the town’s website. Naturally, I wanted to see those documents for myself and waited with anticipation for them to be posted.
Here is his resolution:
It's more than two weeks after he first brought the documents up. The documents have not been posted on Clerkbase or anywhere else, as far as I know. Discussion about posting the documents has been delayed until April.
I had a feeling something like this might happen so on March 8, I filed a request for those documents under the state Access to Public Records Act (APRA).
Since then, I did get hold of one of those documents, described in Deputy Dan’s Council resolution as a 50-page historical record regarding the Ninigret Land Transfer. Click here for my analysis of that document.
But the second document, described by Deputy Dan as the 1979 Land Transfer Agreement, has still not been provided to me, even though it is obviously a public document.
The Town Clerk’s reason for failing to meet the 10-business-day deadline for giving me the document is that the document has not been given to her – presumably by Deputy Dan Slattery.
This is the second time that Deputy Dan Slattery has made a major big deal about records he collected, where he brandished them at a Town Council meeting and used them to push his agenda – but failed to enter those documents in the public record.
 |
| The infamous Glista Gang - varmints! |
The last time was Deputy Dan’s infamous investigation into the Glista Gang – a.k.a. the Friends of Ninigret Park – in which Deputy Dan said he had collected a 2-inch-thick file full of records that exonerated the Glista Gang. Yet, Slattery would not give up those records – even after he promised to show them to fellow Council members. Slattery reneged on that promise as soon as one Council member, Gregg Avedisian , sought to take him up on his promise.
In that case, Slattery had some putative basis to claim that his investigative notes and files were private work product and exempt. I dropped my appeal of his refusal to disclose the records after Slattery admitted that he conducted his “investigation” totally on his own, with no authority or approval from the town.
But this time, Slattery is using what are clearly – based on his own descriptions – public records, not private notes or work product. In my opinion, under the APRA, Slattery must hand over those records to the Town Clerk forthwith.
Under the state open records law, the first step in the appeals process is to file an appeal with the Town Administrator. If the Town Administrator turns down my appeal – or can’t satisfy it – the next step is the Attorney General’s office.
I’ve gone down this road with Deputy Dan before. Guess I’d better saddle up and get ready to ride down that trail again.
Here’s my appeal to the Town Administrator filed Friday morning:
Dear Mr. DiLibero:
This is an APPEAL of a de facto denial of a request for records under the state APRA.
On March 8, I requested access to the two records referred to in a resolution of Council member Dan Slattery (See attached).
The document referred to as #1 in Slattery’s resolution has been provided. Thank you.
The second document, referred to as #2, has not.
Ms. Weinreich sent me an e-mail yesterday wherein she says “Hi Will, Just wanted to touch base and let you know that I still have not received “Document #2” as referenced in Mr. Slattery’s motion. Thanks, Amy”
I completely understand how it is impossible to provide a record that has been withheld by a Council member. This situation is similar to my prior effort to gain access to records that were also collected by, referred to, and used by Mr. Slattery as the basis of Town Council action.
In that instance, the documents Slattery held, but did not provide to the town, were allegedly his personal notes and materials he collected in an investigation he later admitted was unauthorized by the town. I withdrew my appeal in that instance, upon Slattery’s statement admitting his irresponsible actions.
This situation is different. The record Slattery refers to is clearly a public record. Based on his description of the record in his resolution, it seems reasonable to believe that not only are it is in his possession, but it must also exist somewhere within the town’s records on the Ninigret land transfer in 1979.
These are not personal notes or work product covered by APRA exemption. These are public records subject to APRA disclosure.
For that reason, I file this appeal and insist that the requested document be produced forthwith.
