Stonewalled: East Haven residents fight for transparency

For residents looking for information about how their government is operating, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is rarely a first step. Records requests require time and cost investments, making FOIA a last resort to be turned to when public officials ignore questions or won’t turn over information through other channels.

But as anyone who’s filed a FOIA request knows, public officials who are already stonewalling requests for information may not become any more eager to disclose that information through FOIA. By not requiring public agencies to respond to records requests within a certain time period, Connecticut’s FOI law also facilitates public officials’ ability to drag their heels in turning over documents when they don’t want to.

And that doesn’t leave an interested member of the public looking for information about actions taken by their government with many options.

That’s the position East Haven residents Lorena Venegas and Patrick Rowland currently find themselves in. Between them, the pair have submitted over a dozen FOIA requests to East Haven and the Tweed-New Haven Airport Authority (TNHAA). While those requests have been acknowledged, most have not been fulfilled months, and in some cases over a year, later.

Subsequent requests for an update on their status have been ignored.

Venegas described her efforts to obtain public information from East Haven and Mayor Joseph Carfora’s administration as a rollercoaster. She said efforts to have questions answered were easier when Carfora first came into office in 2019.

“They were very open, and then after COVID, everything changed.” Venegas said.

Venegas, who has previously spoken to Inside Investigator about her activism around an expansion at the Tweed-New Haven Airport, says she is all about civic education and showing that one person can make a difference.

“We’re all privy to public information.” said Venegas. “We should be asking questions.”

Five years ago, Venegas began attending public meetings in East Haven. She found few if any residents were attending and that public officials weren’t taking what residents said seriously as a result.

So Venegas looked to do something about it. She chose development as an issue of focus since everyone in town, regardless of where they lived, is affected. She started educating herself by looking at the town website, following the Zoning Commission, and learning about how regulations are made.

“Understanding how to change the regulations is how you impact the situation.” Venegas said.

But while Venegas now says she’s in a position where she’s able to effect change, she’s hit a different type of challenge. Venegas calls it the “vacuum of information.”

Instead of sharing public information, East Haven and TNHAA officials aren’t responsive to residents’ questions.

That, she says, is concerning. “I love public policy, I love the meeting of the minds, but we don’t have that right now.”

Venegas’ concern isn’t just town officials’ general lack of communication, but what it means for East Haven residents affected by an expansion project at nearby Tweed-New Haven Airport.

The first phase of the project involves acquisitions of new lands, runway additions, and terminal development. Venegas and others are concerned about effects like environmental degradation and noise pollution. And, according to Venegas, neither she nor East Haven are getting the answers they need.

“As a town, there were no negotiations with the airport. We’re not privy to the lease. There’s a community benefits plan, but it’s shortchanged compared to what New Haven gets, to what others are getting. Right now East Haven is sitting not knowing what it needs. Decisions are being made behind the scenes.” Venegas said. And while the airport does hold regular meetings, Venegas says they’re “so watered down” that the public doesn’t get context from them. “We’re just getting little bits and pieces.” Venegas added.

One of Venegas’ primary concerns is noise pollution. In December 2023, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued a finding stating that the proposed expansion would have no significant environmental threat to the surrounding area. The environmental assessment has since been challenged by Save the Sound and East Haven officials.

But as part of the FAA’s finding , the agency conducted grid point analysis to compare changes in noise levels that could be expected as a result of the expansion. According to the analysis, when a proposed action would result in a change in the Day Night Average Sound Level (DNL) greater than or equal to 65 decibels and cause a noise increase of at least 1.5 decibels, the impact is considered significant.

The FAA’s analysis found a number of areas where the expansion would cause a significant noise increase. According to the agency’s finding, the areas are “located at either end of the runway, where the DNL 65 contour has a rounded “shoulder” shape that is the result of start-of-takeoff-roll noise emanating from jet aircraft departing in the opposite direction.” While the analysis shows the expansion would lessen noise in some areas, it also shows a significant increase in others, and primarily in residential areas.

For those areas that would experience a significant increase in DNL, the FAA’s analysis also shows it increasing between 2026 and 2031.

The issue of airport noise is not a new one. In 2011, TNHAA began a voluntary noise study for areas surrounding the airport as a way to “put in place a comprehensive long-term noise compatibility plan for its operations and promote a collaborative relationship with the community.” The study produced noise exposure maps, which identified where noise pollution was occurring and would likely occur in the future, and a noise compatibility program. Both were approved by the FAA in 2021. One of the recommendations was for the airport to provide insulation in the homes of residents in eligible areas.

In October 201, TNHAA contracted with the Jones Payne Group to implement a Residential Sound Insulation Program. This provides sound insulation improvements, including upgrading windows and doors, caulking and weather-stripping doors and windows, increasing attic insulation, and improving air ventilation, for free to eligible homes.

Information about the program and eligibility requirements is located on a website that the TNHAA has said is outdated. A new website is in development but so far has not yet materialized.

At a February 20 meeting of the TNHAA’s Environmental Stewardship Committee, member Michael Jones presented plans for a new website. According to meeting minutes, “The new platform aims to enhance community engagement and provide comprehensive information on noise mitigation efforts, eligibility for sound insulation programs, and noise exposure maps.”

The new site was set to launch in April, with a development period of 60 days. But the website didn’t launch in April.

Jones provided an update at the committee’s April 16 meeting , reporting that a contract had been executed and would focus on two components. The first involved redesigning the website “to enhance visual appeal and provide a more comprehensive dataset.” The second involved appointing Prudence Parry, of the Jones Payne Group, to act as a community liaison and answer resident questions about the program. In that meeting, the website was expected by the end of May. According to communication from a representative from Tweed on June 4, 2024, the website is currently expected to launch by the end of July.

The committee also discussed other noise-related issues during the same meeting. Committee member Kenneth Dagliere inquired about the scope of the noise impact area surrounding the airport. TNHAA executive director Tom Rafter noted that the boundaries are defined by the Noise Exposure Map developed during the environmental assessment for the expansion and approved by the FAA and that updates are anticipated after the project is expanded.

Jones also provided information about the next phase of the sound insulation program, saying that it is expected to involve approximately 56 properties and last three to five years.

To Venegas, that information is too vague. Venegas says the TNHAA has previously cited a different number—53 properties—that will potentially be eligible for noise insulation assistance. Nor has the airport publicly released any more specific information about what properties will be eligible or how that eligibility is being determined.

Venegas has filed multiple FOIAs on this subject, the last of which she filed on April 21 after the Environmental Stewardship Committee’s April 16 meeting and the April 17 TNHAA board meeting. Venegas requested the noise contour map mentioned at both meetings from Rafter. In addition, she requested a list of assumptions used to make the contour map, a list of homes that may be eligible to apply for noise insulation, the name of the vendor hired to run the updated airport noise website, and the name and contact information for the person designated to be the website’s community contact. In addition, she noted that Rafter said during the April 17 meeting that eligibility would be determined in phases and asked for an entire list of homes that would be affected through 2064.

When she didn’t receive a response, Venegas followed up on April 26, noting that FOIA requires public agencies to acknowledge requests within four business days.

James Connor, a lawyer from the firm that represents the airport responded on April 29 and, in response to Venegas’ response for the noise contour map, attached the Noise and Air Quality Technical Report that was produced as part of the environmental assessment. He noted this had been provided to Venegas before and said he would search for responsive records to the other elements of Venegas’ request.

On May 8, Venegas again followed up and questioned why she hadn’t received any responsive records. She noted that her questions were derived from two public meetings where information was shared, insinuating this should mean it was readily available. She also noted that the information should be available through the consultant and subcontractor who produced the environmental impact assessment. “The information needs to be shared with the public in its completeness, not just a hard-to-read map and number of eligible homes.” Venegas wrote.

Venegas received no response. She inquired again about the status of the request on May 12 and again received no response.

Venegas says she wants to be able to take the information to East Haven and to politicians in the town.

“Maybe the mayor could do something about it.” Venegas said, referencing concerns about noise and other kinds of pollution residents fear the expansion will cause. “We could form a subcommittee, do tests. Other areas have done this.”

Venegas referenced a 2019 lawsuit brought by the New York attorney general’s office after testing at the Westchester County Airport, which Avports also operates, revealed groundwater contamination in wells that was believed to be tied to firefighting foam used by the Air National Guard decades previously. Venegas stated that residents of the area affected by the contamination ended up with health accounts as a result.

“Why are we getting less than?” she asked.

Venegas’ request for information about updated noise contour maps is not her only request that has been ignored.

According to a FOIA Inside Investigator submitted to the TNHAA,  airport officials have received 13 public records requests between April 22, 2023, and May 8, 2024. All but one of those were submitted by Venegas and date back to May 16, 2023.

A number of the documents Venegas has requested are documents referenced in public meetings. Her May 16, 2023 FOIA request sought two resolutions for approval of lease and development agreements the board voted to approve in July 2022. Another request, filed on December 22, 2023, seeks a slide presentation given by the CEO of Avports, the company that manages the airport, at a Greater New Haven Chamber of Commerce meeting.

Others seek documents related to the FAA’s finding of no impact or other FAA investigations.

According to TNHAA, all FOIA requests the airport received in that timeframe have been completed. Venegas disputes that. She said she never received a number of documents from the requests TNHAA maintains it has closed, including a benefit cost analysis that was part of the environment assessment, and a report of the airport from an FAA inspection.

TNHAA’s community liaison said the airport has no issues handling FOI requests.

“The process, as you may have found out, is straight forward. That request is forwarded to the authority’s legal counsel for processing.” TNHAA’s representative Andrew King said.

But this wasn’t Inside Investigator’s experience.

Nowhere on its website does the airport address its handling of FOI requests or indicate to whom requests should be submitted. Inside Investigator first filed a request seeking information on all pending and completed requests the airport had received in the previous year with Hoey on April 22, 2024.

When that request had not been acknowledged by May 2—well past the four-day deadline FOIA imposes on state agencies to acknowledge receipt of requests—Inside Investigator followed up to ensure the request had been received and inquire if it should be submitted somewhere differently.

On May 8, Inside Investigator reached out to Rafter asking where the appropriate place to file an FOIA request was. Rafter responded requests could be forwarded to him and that the airport was “working on developing a formal policy to address this and other FOIA questions.”

TNHAA’s community liaison said there is no timeline for rolling out the formalized FOIA request timelines but that they’ll be published to the airport website “when the time comes.”

Inside Investigator’s request was fulfilled on May 13.

Venegas has also submitted several FOIA requests to East Haven. As with her FOIA requests directed at the airport, many of these have gone unanswered and requests for updates on their status have gone unanswered.

Venegas shared 4 FOIA requests to East Haven, dating back as far as November 2022. The oldest of those requests began as a request for information about aviation taxes from the town’s tax collector and, according to Venegas, was turned into a FOIA without her making any request.

On November 2, 2022, Venegas emailed Shayna Acampora, the town’s tax collector, with a question about aviation taxes. Acampora replied that she would research the issue and get back to her.

Five days later, Venegas received an email from town attorney Michael Luzzi acknowledging her request of the information through FOIA.

“At what point did this turn into an FOIA? Was my email to Ms. Acampora forwarded to you? I was not notified that my email was forwarded to you. Any person can walk into Town Hall of East Haven and request the same report. In fact, others have and been given a print out. Why is there a change of business procedure for a function of the tax office? How would you know what information I am requesting and what needs to be researched if there was no follow-up by tax office staff?” Venegas wrote back to Luzzi. She never received a response.

Patrick Rowland is also a resident of East Haven and, like Venegas, has sought to use FOIA to uncover public information. Like Venegas, he’s had numerous requests, some dating back to 2022, unfulfilled by the town.

“For the most part they seem to kind of do whatever they feel like.” said Rowland. He described the town’s attitude towards requests for information as antagonistic. “You have to FOI just to get something simple.” Rowland added.

One of the pieces of information Rowland has tried to collect from East Haven is its grand list, which lists the aggregate value of the town’s taxable property. Rowland filed a FOIA request for copies of the grand list for 2022, 2021, and 2020 on February 5, 2023. His request was acknowledged three days later by a member of the assessor’s office, who asked if he was looking for a complete and detailed version of the grand lists or just a summary of their totals.

Rowland responded the same day, writing that he would prefer the full document. When the town employee responded, she noted that part of the problem with Rowland’s request was that he was seeking the list from prior years and she wasn’t sure how to obtain that.

Rowland said she could start with the current year. Again on February 8, the town employee responded for a final time, saying she would get the information as soon as possible. She added that she believed the city only sent the totals to the state.

On May 14, three months later, Rowland followed up and asked about the status of the request. He says he never received any documents from the request.

Rowland believes the town doesn’t want to turn the data over to him because it would reveal the grand list is inaccurate, which could affect property taxes. “I really think they’ve done a bad job with it.” Rowland said. He noted that East Haven lost the assessor over two years ago in the middle of a dispute and the position hasn’t been filled since. “I just think it’s wrong. I think it’s wrong enough the whole thing should be thrown out, but I don’t have the data to prove it.”

“There are anomalies across the board. Having the data is something I really wanted to dig into.” Rowland added.

Rowland notes the grand list is information that should exist and be easy for the town to produce. “They have to send the data to the state. I’m not even requesting something someone had to go make. Just give me a jump drive.” Rowland said.

State statute requires all municipalities to annually publish their town’s grand list by January 31. The Office of Policy and Management (OPM) collects and publishes the data annually. An annual dataset is available on the state’s OpenData portal . A summary of the information is also available on the town’s website , but is out-of-date, with information from only 2020 available.

Rowland is aware the data he’s looking for is available through OPM but questions why the town isn’t just providing it when it’s already available, since it must be provided to OPM.

“You ask for something simple and they turn around and make it a $200 request from the town attorney.” he said.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Rowland requested expense reports for a number of town officials, including the mayor, police chief, and superintendent of schools.

Rowland requested the information because he wanted to see whether town officials were going on trips during the pandemic, such as to an annual municipal management conference, and to see where money was being spent during the lockdowns.

The request, which Rowland submitted on July 29, 2022, was acknowledged by the town’s attorney on August 3, 2022. On September 27, 2022, Rowland followed up to inquire about the status of the request. He received no response. On January 14, 2023, he followed up again. Again, he received no response.

According to Rowland, an employee for the town’s board of education said he forwarded the requested information to the town. But the town never forwarded it. Rowland never received any documents from the request.

Each municipality in the state handles FOIA requests differently. Some utilize online portals similar to those used by many state agencies to funnel requests to the appropriate departments. Others direct requests straight to the departments and town officials who handle the data being requested.

Understanding where to file a municipal FOIA request is not always easy, especially as not all towns publicly post information about where requests should be directed.

East Haven is among those towns. A page on the town website dedicated to helping residents find information does not mention FOIA. A keyword search of the town website also turns up nothing.

East Haven routes all FOIA requests through its town attorney. Inside Investigator learned this after finding that a phone number for the town attorney’s office is available on the town website, but an email address is not.

In an effort to determine how many requests the town has received, Inside Investigator submitted a FOIA request on April 22 seeking records of all other FOIA requests various departments in the town had received in the past year, including the mayor’s office, the building department, the economic development department, the legal department, and the planning and zoning department.

The mayor’s office notified Inside Investigator the same day that all requests are forwarded to the town attorney’s office. The town clerk was the only other entity to respond and inform Inside Investigator the request to the planning and zoning department had been forwarded.

Michael Luzzi, the town attorney, acknowledged the request on April 26.

At the time of publication, Inside Investigator has not received any documentation or further communication about the request.

Without information about how many requests are pending in East Haven, it’s impossible to know the full extent of East Haven’s FOIA problem.

The town has been before the Freedom of Information Commission (FOIC) a handful of times in the last several decades, with two cases ending with a finding that town officials violated FOIA. Most recently, a 2021 complaint against the mayor’s office was dismissed because the complainant failed to appear for a scheduled hearing.

One possible explanation for the lack of fulfillment is that the town, by funneling all requests through the town’s attorney’s office, has created a logjam.

A similar situation has contributed to Bridgeport’s extensive and high-profile inability to handle FOIA requests, which has resulted in a rare fine for noncompliance from the FOIC. The city has funneled review of all requests it receives through the desk of a single person in its legal department..

East Haven did not respond to a request for comment about when or why the town decided to route all FOIA requests through the town attorney.

Inside Investigator also submitted requests for records of FOIA requests received by various municipal departments in the nearby towns of North Branford, New Haven, North Haven and Branford on May 13.

While North Branford has a smaller population than East Haven, and New Haven has a significantly larger population, Branford and North Haven are towns of a similar size.

In total, Inside Investigator sent 13 requests to various departments in the municipality and received a response from at least one department in each municipality, with the exception of New Haven. Unlike the other towns Inside Investigator sought information from, New Haven utilizes an online data portal. While Inside Investigator sought information from specific departments in the other towns, our request to New Haven was for a record of all FOIA requests the city has received in the past year.

Inside Investigator received a response to two of the four requests it submitted in North Branford. The town’s economic development commission had received no requests during the specific time period. Town assessor Dave Ambrose not only provided a list of requests his office had received, but also inquired about forwarding the data from those requests. In addition, he forwarded another request that did not mention FOIA but “might be helpful.” According to Ambrose, the majority of requests received by the office are for the town’s grand list and are always requested informally because they are transparent.

An employee in the Branford Board of Selectmen’s office informed Inside Investigator that, like East Haven, all requests were handled by a singular office and forwarded all requests the town had received in the specified timeframe. All but one request was either completed or required no action on the town’s part. The only open request was waiting for the requester to review documents.

In North Haven, two of the offices from which Inside Investigator requested data received no requests for the specified timeframe. The planning and zoning department did not maintain a list of requests it received but forwarded a request that fit the timeframe, which had been fulfilled.

At the time of publication, four of Inside Investigator’s requests to municipalities surrounding East Haven were outstanding: one to the North Branford planning and zoning department, one to the North Branford town manager’s office, one to the North Haven town clerk’s office, and a request to New Haven.

The post Stonewalled: East Haven residents fight for transparency appeared first on Connecticut Inside Investigator .