Baum: Email Lawsuit Sought "Right of Review" Prior to Release of Information

I am writing to provide some clarity regarding the lawsuit filed with respect to Twp Committeeman Tony Fiore's request for emails sent between myself and the library director on our personal email accounts.

 There seems to be limited understanding about the lawsuit, so let me clarify a few points. First, I filed the suit. Per my understanding of the process, we were applying for a TRO (temporary restraining order) which, if granted, would have prevented release of emails between private accounts temporarily. Certainly, not all correspondence between private email accounts, regardless of the subject matter, is public in nature, and therefore a privacy interest exists.

 Essentially, what we were seeking was a right of review in order to raise objection to the release of certain emails, or certatin parts of emails, or certain attachments which are non-public in nature. And in fact there was little I was objecting to based on review of my own records.

The judge did not grant the TRO, chose not to give me an opportunity for review, and ruled that emails with regard to library business (public business) could be released. So faith was put in the library's attorney, Armen McOmber, who represented himself (the library) as the records custodian and the right person to do the review. And he should have been diligent in complying with the law by making all appropriate redactions. However, it appears he didn't redact anything, including my phone number and personal work products. This clear failure demonstrates why a person with a privacy interest should have a legal right of review.

Certainly, had the situation been reversed -- had I requested Mr. Fiore's emails -- Fiore would have had that opportunity.

Thank you.

Respectfully,
Linda Baum