New Jersey Town Sues 82-Year-Old Woman For Exercising Her Rights
from the move-sure-to-endear-the-town-to-its-residents dept
It’s your right to request records from public agencies. That fact cannot be disputed. The Freedom of Information Act guarantees it in regards to federal agencies and every state has their own laws that guarantee access to public records.
The town of Irvington, New Jersey apparently believes it only has to do so much when it comes to serving the public. Because it feels it’s only obligated to do so much, it has chosen to go to war with a public records requester, hoping to deter her from future requests by draining her of what is surely a limited amount of income at this point in her life.
Elouise McDaniel prefers to deal with matters over the phone or via fax machine, but she made an exception last fall when her email pinged with a notification from Irvington Township.
McDaniel, 82, was informed she was being sued for, among other reasons, filing over 75 requests for township information within a three-year span via New Jersey’s Open Public Records Act.
Preparing to respond to the “voluminous OPRA requests has been unduly burdensome, time consuming and expensive,” the township said in the Sept. 17 civil suit, which was first reported by NBC 4 New York.
These are some bullshit claims. First off, the public will pay for the production of the records, so complaints about expenses are nothing more than indications these agencies would prefer to serve the public even less. If you’re in the business of generating public records using public money, you’re obligated to provide those records when they’re requested. If something seems too “burdensome,” you can always ask the requester to narrow their request.
What you should never do is sue the requester. This is not only bad optics, but it’s likely to result in rulings demanding more compliance with requests, rather than the outcome the government is seeking.
The complaint [PDF] (provided by FIRE’s Adam Steinbaugh since neither NJ.com or NBC 4 felt obligated to provide this public record to the public) attempts to paint McDaniel as a harasser of public officials — something that extends to her requests for public records. The town’s claims are ridiculous considering those filing the lawsuit still hold the power in Irvington.
The GRC [Government Records Council] made determinations that Plaintiff’s OPRA requests were invalid and that the Custodian’s actions did not rise to the level of a knowing and willful violation of OPRA and unreasonable denial of access under the totality of the circumstances.
In the past three years Defendant has participated in numerous City Council Meetings often disturbing the peace and otherwise acting in a confrontational and harassing manner.
On or about December 12, 2017 Defendant pointed at a Township Councilperson stating “I’m going to get you and you’re going to pay” while walking towards the Councilperson. This harassing behavior resulted in criminal Summons being filed against Defendant who pled guilty to an Amended Charge of Disturbing the Peace.
Between May and June 2021 Defendant organized meetings with the Mayor which were initially understood to address the topics of the Township’s “Team Up Clean Up Program” but were instead utilized by the Defendant to engage in unauthorized and unrelated political disturbance.
Defendant has bullied and annoyed Township administration on repeated occasions, and has otherwise continued to disrupt Township operations.
First off, the disturbing the peace charge is bullshit. Telling a political official your “going to get them and they’re going to pay” doesn’t rise to the level of criminal behavior. Even the least-charitable reading of this phrase should indicate nothing more than someone telling an elected rep they’re going to hold them accountable for their actions.
Whatever other “disturbances” this woman caused were the sort of thing town officials should have expected to happen. It sounds like some deception may have been deployed to force the Mayor to confront other issues McDaniel felt needed addressing. This sort of thing happens in public meetings all the time. It’s not evidence of anything.
As for being “bullied and annoyed,” suck it up, township reps. That comes with the territory. And when you still hold the power as town officials, it’s highly unlikely a resident subject to your ordinances and regulations can actually “bully” you.
There are more claims of harassment, defamation, and “bullying” in the first several pages of the complaint. The township also claims McDaniel is using the name of a defunct non-profit (Irvington Block Association Coalition [IBAC], whose corporate status was revoked in 2018 for non-payment of fees) to disguise some of her requests.
That being said, this is a lawsuit over ~25 requests a year (or two per month) — hardly an inordinate number of requests from a single resident. The lawsuit attempts to turn public records requests into a form of harassment by conflating them with other, in-person activities (which all sound like protected speech) McDaniel has engaged in.
It might be possible for the town to talk a judge into a restraining order. Dumber stuff has happened. But the town won’t be able to sustain it. And if they think responding to two requests a month from McDaniel is “burdensome,” just wait until they get into discovery.
It’s unlikely a judge will grant this request, especially when — after McDaniel responds to the lawsuit — questions will be raised about what compelled the Mayor and his town to engage in this litigation. There’s plenty of animus on both sides, but that doesn’t automatically make the town somehow more righteous in its indignation.
Back-and-forth’s with Irvington township and Vauss, who was elected as mayor in May 2014, have been common over the years, McDaniel said. It culminated with her attempted run against Vauss for mayor in 2018. That proved unsuccessful after a clerical issue surrounding the petitions filed in her favor, she noted.
This appears be nothing more than irritated public officials trying to find some way to shut someone up. The lawsuit’s claims are ridiculous. The township’s lawsuit cites malicious prosecution as a cause of action, referring to the multiple “frivolous” complaints McDaniel has filed against city leaders. The problem is McDaniel has no power to “prosecute” anyone and if the complaints aren’t sustained (and it appears none have), there’s no prosecution, malicious or otherwise. The defamation allegations are conclusory, providing zero details on what McDaniel said that was “knowingly false.”
This is low-level thuggery from a town that feels it shouldn’t be obligated to provide public records to a person who hasn’t exactly endeared herself to town officials. Too bad. Critics are often the most dogged in their pursuit of public records. That’s just how it goes. Friendly residents are least likely to expect accountability from their public leaders. But government power is borrowed from the people, an incursion on their rights in exchange for public services. The obligation line runs from public officials to the people they serve, not vice versa. Hopefully, this lawsuit will be tossed quickly with an admonishment from the judge about wasting taxpayers’ time and money arguing against their best interests.
Filed Under: 1st amendment, elouise mcdaniel, foia, free speech, harassment, irvington, new jersey, public records, transparency
