Submitted by Brian Raabe, Greenwich
1 – There appear to be two lawsuits that the Town of Greenwich is engaged in.
Notice was filed with the court last week of depositions and other activity well into next year.
There is literally no end in sight to the Town of Greenwich versus the Greenwich Board of Education legal action.
https://civilinquiry.jud.ct.
2 – One of the actions taken is a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) complaint whereby Fred Camillo is the sole complainant.
The town had been a joint complainant, but the FOIA Commission removed the town for reasons that are spelled out here. The link also contains case background.
https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/
“The complainant also named the Town of Greenwich as a co-complainant in the complaint. However, a municipality is not a “person” within the meaning of§ 1-200(4), G.S., so the Town is not a proper complainant under §l-206(b)(l ), G.S. Therefore, the Commission, in its discretion and in accordance with §l-2lj-30 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies (“R.C.S.A”), removed the Town of Greenwich as a co-complainant…”
3 – In reference to the above, where Fred Camillo is the sole complainant, is Citizen Fred paying his own legal bills?
If he is not, why not?
4 – Who is authorizing payment of bills in all these related legal matters? What is the status of legal bills to the BOE?
It has been said that the Board of Education legal bills are not being paid.
If these bills have been properly submitted and the town has refused to pay them, why?
And if it is the case that the bills are unpaid, isn’t the effect to starve a town agency of representation in its litigation versus another town agency?
That’s how twisted this has become, it is hard to keep up – or understand how we are both mugger and victim, and why we may be paying one department’s legal bills and not another – in a lawsuit against ourselves.
Who is authorizing payment, and possible non-payment, of these various bills and by what authority if Town Counsel has recused themselves.
5 – The genesis of this litigation was a BOE meeting that has since been nullified by the FOIA Commission for having been held on an emergency basis but not rising to the level of an emergency.
This is the only action the FOIA commission is taking. The full background and decision are once again available via the link at top.
Yet litigation continues.
Why?
6 – The First Selectman should provide a list of the (very) specific goals to be had from continued litigation.
The goals of incurring substantial ADDITIONAL legal fees should be defined before the year 2026 of scheduled legal action ahead.
These goals should be made public, and a cost benefit analysis shared to determine if the massive expenditure (already made and growing) is prudent.
For something as unusual (read, non-sensical) as a town suing itself, and with legal bills scaling, deliberation and debate should be seeing the light of day.
That has not happened.
Who is this litigation serving and how?
Who is making these decisions?
Specifically.
In conclusion
There has been an election. Democrats secured the power of the purse on the Board of Estimate and Taxation (BET). The theme throughout the election was the mismanagement of the school budget by BET’s prior leadership. This likely contributed to the turnover.
Is the First Selectman attempting to use the courts to do what he can no longer accomplish via the BET?
Is he upending the school system through continued legal action against the Board of Education?
The First Selectman appears so myopically focused on litigation he doesn’t seem capable of solving an issue as simple as parking school buses.
How can the town not find a spot for parking buses? Why are we still dealing with this?
Next steps.
A letter like this needs a “respond by” date or it is not productive.
The Greenwich Town Attorney and First Selectman should provide answers to the preceding questions on a public platform – the Town’s website or otherwise, by 11/30/25.
All legal bills incurred on this litigation and their payment status should be easily retrieved. They should be made public.
In addition, a public hearing should be considered before year end 2025.
Questions should be asked and answered in a structured, public setting with informed parties providing facts for residents.
Failure to provide documentation and/or notice a hearing date by 11/30/2025 will prompt a FOIA request seeking all related material and communications.
Please retain all.
The Town could of course end this knife fight in a phone booth and drop the lawsuits we literally cannot win.
That would be leadership.
Brian Raabe