Post by standish on Apr 18, 2008 15:53:48 GMT -5
Some of you may have read the article about the unanimous decision by the full Freedom of Information Commission against the town's withholding of JMA Associates' Old Wethersfield Master Plan. Below is a letter I sent to parties at Imprint Newspapers regarding that article:
Dear Ted (Glanzer; article author) and Company,
In today's article on FOI, my comments were taken out of context and your interpretations were not entirely accurate. Firstly, the "example of officials circling the wagons around a less-than-stellar decision" was spoken in the context of both my complaint and the other FOI complaint before the Commission on the same agenda as mine, pertaining to the Historic District Commission, and in regard to Comstock, Ferre & Company and review standards. The bad decision to which I referred was Comstock, reference to which (along with the other complaint), was entirely absent from the article.
While Bonnie cites only five complaints in her "20 years of working with town governments", two of the five complaints were in Wethersfield, just this past year. Most of Bonnie's previous time was spent in Berlin or Hartford, not Wethersfield. Furthermore, one of the key issues with drafts (preliminary or otherwise) is whether the public interest is better served by releasing or withholding information. The burden of proof is on the municipality.
The implication that my decision to take the dispute to FOI caused the town's expenditure is not correct. Bonnie's decision to withhold what should have been public information was the cause of the expense.
I am somewhat disappointed in the tone of the article. I understand that it is a complex topic and is somewhat difficult to understand. However, as a private citizen, my eagerness to cooperate in future will be tempered with a level of skepticism as to how my comments will be used.
Best Regards,
Leigh Standish
Dear Ted (Glanzer; article author) and Company,
In today's article on FOI, my comments were taken out of context and your interpretations were not entirely accurate. Firstly, the "example of officials circling the wagons around a less-than-stellar decision" was spoken in the context of both my complaint and the other FOI complaint before the Commission on the same agenda as mine, pertaining to the Historic District Commission, and in regard to Comstock, Ferre & Company and review standards. The bad decision to which I referred was Comstock, reference to which (along with the other complaint), was entirely absent from the article.
While Bonnie cites only five complaints in her "20 years of working with town governments", two of the five complaints were in Wethersfield, just this past year. Most of Bonnie's previous time was spent in Berlin or Hartford, not Wethersfield. Furthermore, one of the key issues with drafts (preliminary or otherwise) is whether the public interest is better served by releasing or withholding information. The burden of proof is on the municipality.
The implication that my decision to take the dispute to FOI caused the town's expenditure is not correct. Bonnie's decision to withhold what should have been public information was the cause of the expense.
I am somewhat disappointed in the tone of the article. I understand that it is a complex topic and is somewhat difficult to understand. However, as a private citizen, my eagerness to cooperate in future will be tempered with a level of skepticism as to how my comments will be used.
Best Regards,
Leigh Standish
