A motion on the agenda at the Saugerties Town Board meeting on Wednesday, February 14 to deny any and all Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) requests and appeals in regard to matters of ongoing investigations and attorney/client-privileged documents or information was pulled and replaced with a narrower version that applied essentially to one particular case. When the motion came up for discussion, supervisor Fred Costello read the amended motion: “I would like to make a motion to deny the following request: ‘Pursuant to Freedom of Information Law, we appeal the Town Board’s decision to deny information as follows: received on February 7 2024 in response to the FOIL request sent February 6, 2024. The original FOIL was sent on January 29, 2024, and was denied for the reasons set below as identified by the council.’” The motion was seconded by councilwoman Leeanne Thornton. The board voted 4-1, with Costello in opposition, to table the revised resolution.
Costello then read the full response, which he said the petitioner — Paul Andreassen, a former town board member — had said was inadequate.
The requests from Andreassen asked for the town police report for an incident on December 6, 2023, on Market Street in the village. A second request involved seeking information about an “official complaint” regarding the incident.
“The request for a police report related to an incident on Main Street on December 6 [was denied] as the incident is still under an ongoing police investigation, and disclosure would interfere with the ongoing investigation. Moreover, disclosure of the incident could constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy to this person. As such, the report is exempt from disclosure.”
Regarding another item in the request, Costello said, the response was, “There is no such complaint that exists; the incident is still under an ongoing police investigation and disclosure would interfere with the ongoing police investigation. Moreover, due to the nature of the incident, disclosure could constitute an unwarranted invasion of the personal privacy of the person involved; as such the complaint, if any, is exempt from disclosure.”
With regard to point number three in the complaint “filed by Councilman Mike Ivino of excessive force by a police officer, Lieutenant Kenneth Swart has advised that he cannot locate any record of any complaints filed by Ivino, and furthermore Lieutenant Swart said he is unaware of any excessive force claims reported during the period December 7, 2023 to December 25, 2023. As such, there is no record to produce in response to this request.”
Costello also explained that information about a court clerk’s complaint to the board. The point of the rather lengthy review was to make it clear that the town was not simply refusing a request for records out of hand and without good reason. Costello acknowledged that Andreassen has every right to disagree and to appeal the decision.
Councilman Zach Horton said he doesn’t see why the lengthy and complicated motion was needed. “The way the law is written, it already allows entities to deny a request or an appeal based on certain criteria,” he said. “We’re stating that this request meets the criteria, so why does it have to… I feel it’s redundant.”
“The request was made in the normal fashion and we responded in the normal fashion,” Costello replied. “But the denial was appealed; the appeal is our responsibility, whether we want to amend or not. This says we don’t want to amend; we want to stand by the answers that were given in the original FOIL, and by memorializing it, the person who is seeking the information can go to the next step. They can choose to take it to the state; they can take it to a court and challenge our decision.” Costello noted that one of the requests concerns a legal action that is currently before the court, and disclosure could have legal consequences. In effect, Andreassen is appealing the board’s denial of his request. “I’m not sure we are the ones he should be appealing to,” Horton said.
In the final vote on a motion offered by councilwoman Peg Nau, the motion was tabled, with Costello casting the lone vote against.
“I think it’s worth noting where these FOILs are coming from; the press knows they are coming from Mr. Andreassen himself,” said councilman Michael Ivino. Citing allegations that there are faults within his FOILs, Ivino added, “I think these FOILs are a political witch hunt on his behalf, and that the confusion for us, as a town board, comes from their narrative and what they are trying to push.”
Join the family! 
