Dear Matawan Borough,

Please accept this electronic request for public records made under OPRA and the common law right of access. I am not required to fill out an official form or use a particular software platform to submit my request per N.J.S.A. 47:1A-6(f), which states that an email from a requestor including all information required on the adopted form shall suffice as a valid government record request.

I HAVE NOT been convicted of any indictable offense under the laws of New Jersey, any other state, or the United States.
I WILL NOT use the requested records for a commercial purpose.
I AM NOT seeking records in connection with a legal proceeding.

Records requested:

I request all executive session minutes of the Borough of Matawan from January 1, 2025 to the present. This request includes:
1. All adopted executive session minutes.
2. All draft executive session minutes.
3. All redacted versions of executive session minutes.
4. All unredacted versions to the extent legally permissible.
5. All certifications, memoranda, logs, or statements documenting what portions of the minutes were redacted and the reasons for redaction.

Citizen protections and legal requirements governing this request:
1. Native format production requirement (Paff v. Galloway):

• All electronic records must be produced in their original native formats including DOCX, MSG, EML, PST, XLSX, CSV, ICS, and EXIF-intact images.
• Documents created electronically must not be printed, scanned, or converted to PDF.

2. Metadata requirement:

• Metadata is part of the government record. Include creation dates, modification dates, authors, file paths, email headers, and version history where available.

3. Redaction rules:

• If any portion is redacted or withheld, provide a GRC-compliant redaction index with the specific statutory basis for each redaction.
• Redactions must be narrowly tailored. Blanket or generalized exemptions are prohibited.

4. Seven-business-day rule:

• This request is made under N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(i). The Borough must respond within 7 business days.

5. Anti-delay protections:

• Requests for clarification do not toll the statutory 7-day deadline unless legally necessary.
• Delays based on staffing, workload, interdepartmental routing, or waiting for third parties are not valid under OPRA.

6. Anti-extension protections:

• Any extension request must include:
a. A specific factual justification
b. A statutory basis
c. A firm date certain
• Open-ended or vague extensions are unlawful under Burnett v. Gloucester, Paff v. DOC, and GRC precedent.

7. Splitting of records:

• Any records currently available must be provided immediately. OPRA prohibits withholding available records while awaiting others.

8. Third-party records rule:

• Records stored with outside counsel or consultants are government records and must be retrieved.

9. Custodian responsibility:

• If you are not the custodian of records, you must immediately forward this request to the correct custodian and provide their name and email address.

10. State and federal protections:

• This request is a protected activity under the New Jersey Open Public Records Act (N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1 et seq.).
• It is also protected under:
a. First Amendment, U.S. Constitution
b. Article I, Paragraph 18, New Jersey Constitution
c. New Jersey Civil Rights Act (N.J.S.A. 10:6-1 et seq.)
d. Federal transparency and anti-retaliation principles
• No adverse action, obstruction, or retaliation may be taken against a citizen for filing an OPRA request.

My preferred delivery method for all responses is email with attachments.

Please confirm receipt of this request. If you are not the custodian of records, forward it immediately to the correct custodian and provide their email address.

Thank you,
John Certo

Dear Records Custodian Wynne,

I write in response to the December 9, 2025 correspondence transmitted by outside counsel, Plosia Cohen LLC, regarding my November 30, 2025 OPRA and common law request for all executive session minutes of the Borough of Matawan from January 1, 2025 to the present, including adopted minutes, draft minutes, redacted and unredacted versions, and all certifications, memoranda, logs, or statements documenting redactions and the reasons for them.

Your counsel’s letter acknowledges that my request is confined to executive session minutes and related redaction documentation for a defined time period, and that these records are associated with specific meeting dates. The letter further states that the Borough requires a three week extension and anticipates providing an initial response or production by December 31, 2025, citing the need to locate minutes across multiple meeting dates, review for Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) and privilege issues, evaluate draft or unadopted minutes, and manage holiday related staffing limitations and closures.

I do not agree to, and do not consent to, the requested three week extension. I expressly preserve all rights under N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(i) and do not waive the seven business day requirement in any respect.

N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(i) requires a custodian to grant or deny access as soon as possible, but not later than seven business days after receiving the request, and permits a reasonable extension only in the event a records custodian is unable to fulfill a records request due to unforeseen circumstances or circumstances that otherwise reasonably necessitate additional time to fulfill the records request, with notice of the extension provided within seven business days of receipt. The reasons identified in your counsel’s letter for a three week delay are that executive session minutes span multiple dates and must be reviewed individually, that drafts or unadopted minutes require legal review, that executive session content must be evaluated for OPMA, attorney client privilege, personnel, and litigation concerns, and that you face holiday related staffing limitations and closures. None of these are unforeseen circumstances within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(i). They are ordinary, predictable aspects of handling executive session minutes at the end of the calendar year and were fully apparent as of November 30, 2025, when the request was made, and by December 4, 2025, when the Borough acknowledged receipt.

OPRA places the burden on the custodian to demonstrate why additional time is actually necessary to fulfill a request. General references to the nature of executive session minutes, the need for legal review, and expected holiday schedules do not establish that the Borough is unable to fulfill the request within seven business days. Nor does the letter tie any claimed time need to specific tasks, such as reviewing particular meeting dates or specific sets of minutes, or explain why those tasks cannot be performed within the statutory period using available staff and counsel. For these reasons, I do not agree that a blanket three week extension is reasonable or justified, and I do not consent to one.

I also note that the Borough acknowledged receipt of my request on December 4, 2025, and your counsel’s extension letter is dated December 9, 2025. By waiting until the end of the statutory response window to propose a broad three week extension, the Borough has effectively deprived me of any meaningful opportunity to discuss and consider narrower or staged approaches while still preserving my rights under the seven business day rule. To the extent the Borough is asserting that compliance would substantially disrupt operations, N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(g) requires the custodian to attempt to reach a reasonable solution with the requestor that accommodates the interests of the requestor and the public agency. My original request expressly addressed anti delay protections, including that delays based on routine staffing patterns, workload, interdepartmental routing, or waiting for third parties do not justify withholding access under OPRA and that any extension request must include specific factual justification, a statutory basis, and a firm date. A unilateral three week extension, raised at the end of the response period and grounded in foreseeable circumstances, does not satisfy those requirements.

For these reasons, I expressly decline to agree to the three week extension. I consider my rights under N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(i) fully preserved and do not consent to any waiver or relaxation of the seven business day requirement. To the extent the Borough does not provide access to the requested records, or a written denial citing specific exemptions, within OPRA’s statutory timeframe, I will treat that non compliance as a denial for purposes of my rights under OPRA and any available administrative or judicial review. For the avoidance of doubt, I will accept records whenever they are produced, but I do not agree that late or staggered production cures non compliance with the statutory timeframes.

Even if you continue to contend that additional time is needed for certain records, N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(i) still requires that access be provided as soon as possible, not merely by the end of an extended period. OPRA does not authorize withholding records that are already identified, collected, or readily accessible while the Borough continues to locate or review other records. My request specifically provides that any records currently available must be provided immediately and that OPRA prohibits withholding available records while awaiting others. Accordingly, I request that you immediately produce all responsive records that are presently available and can be disclosed without lengthy additional review, including, at a minimum, any adopted executive session minutes for 2025 that have already been prepared and that contain non exempt portions, any redacted executive session minutes that have previously been prepared for public release, and any existing certifications, memoranda, logs, or statements that document what portions of executive session minutes were redacted, when, by whom, and on what stated grounds. Nothing in OPRA or OPMA authorizes blanket withholding of entire executive session minutes when non exempt content can reasonably be segregated.

To avoid any misunderstanding, I am not requesting that the Borough create a new document, log, or index that does not already exist. However, N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(g) and 47:1A-5(i) require that, when access is denied in whole or in part, the custodian must identify the records being withheld, state the specific statutory basis for non disclosure, and set forth the reasons for the denial. In the context of executive session minutes, compliance with these provisions necessarily requires that your written OPRA response make clear, for each set of 2025 executive session minutes that exists, whether it is being produced in whole, produced in part, or withheld. Accordingly, I request that your written response, and any denial in whole or in part, be structured so that, by meeting date, it is clear whether executive session minutes exist, whether they are draft, unadopted, or adopted, whether any redacted version has already been prepared, and whether the minutes, in whole or in part, are being produced or withheld and, if withheld in any respect, the specific statutory basis and factual reasons for non disclosure. This is not a request to create a new record, but a request that your written OPRA determination comply with the level of specificity required by N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(g) and 47:1A-5(i) and with my original demand for a Government Records Council compliant explanation of any redactions or withholdings.

With respect to exemptions, your counsel’s letter references attorney client privilege, personnel privacy, pending litigation, and OPMA protections in general terms. OPRA requires that any denials or redactions be narrowly tailored, that the specific statutory exemption or exemptions be identified for each record or category of record, and that all reasonably segregable non exempt portions be released. N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(g) and 47:1A-5(i) also require that when you deny access, in whole or in part, you must state the specific legal basis and factual reasons for the denial. My request explicitly demands a Government Records Council compliant redaction index that identifies each withheld or redacted record, the specific statutory basis for each redaction, and a brief description of the record sufficient to understand what is being withheld without revealing the claimed exempt content. General references to confidentiality, executive session, pending litigation, attorney client, or personnel without record by record explanation will not satisfy these requirements.

For any category of records described in my request for which you determine no responsive records exist or are maintained, OPRA requires a certification of non existence under N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(g). Such certifications must identify the offices, locations, and systems searched so that the completeness of the search can be understood. This requirement applies, in particular, to the requested certifications, memoranda, logs, or statements that document redactions and their reasons. If no such documentation has ever been created for any executive session minutes in the requested period, please state so by certification, and identify what process, if any, the Borough uses to determine and track which portions of executive session minutes may be disclosed.

My request also invoked the requirements for native format production and metadata, including that electronic records be produced in their original formats, such as DOCX or similar for minutes, MSG, EML, or PST for emails, and other native formats, and that associated metadata, including creation dates, modification dates, authors, and file paths, be included. Please confirm that executive session minutes and related records will be produced in their native electronic formats with associated metadata, and that records maintained in electronic form will not be printed, scanned, or converted in a way that strips metadata.

Your counsel’s letter invites me to limit the scope of my request by date range or document type. At this time, I decline to narrow or limit the request. It is already confined to clearly defined record types, executive session minutes and associated redaction documentation, and a specific date range, January 1, 2025 to present. However, consistent with N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(g), I am willing to consider a good faith, non prejudicial staging of production that prioritizes records that are easiest to release promptly, such as already adopted minutes and previously redacted versions, followed by more complex materials. Any such staging must begin immediately and may not be used to postpone the release of records that are already available.

Finally, because the December 9, 2025 correspondence was issued by outside counsel rather than directly by you as the statutory Records Custodian, I respectfully request written confirmation from you that the extension request and all positions stated in counsel’s letter are your determinations as custodian, that you have personally directed the search for and review of all executive session minutes and related records responsive to my request, and that all searches, productions, redactions, exemptions, and timing decisions will be made under your authority and in full compliance with N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1 et seq.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. I look forward to the immediate production of all readily available responsive records, a clear, specific written explanation for any withheld material, rolling production as additional records are reviewed, and full compliance with the timing, access, and justification requirements of N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(i) and N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(g).

Sincerely,

John Certo

Dear Records Custodian Karen Wynne,

This is a records preservation notice issued pursuant to N.J.S.A. 47:1A-9 and the common law right of access. Please preserve, maintain, and not destroy, delete, alter, overwrite, conceal, or modify any records responsive to this OPRA request, as well as any records responsive to all OPRA requests I have previously submitted to the Borough of Matawan, while each request is pending and until each is fully and finally resolved. This preservation obligation applies immediately upon receipt of this notice.

This duty applies regardless of routine or automated deletion policies, email retention limits, backup overwrites, document management schedules, device replacement, or any other internal records management practice.

This preservation obligation applies Borough-wide and includes records maintained by any department, office, official, employee, contractor, or agent acting for or on behalf of the Borough.

This preservation obligation applies to all formats and locations where responsive records may reasonably be maintained, including emails, attachments, drafts, internal notes or memoranda, logs, tracking records, databases, shared drives, cloud storage, third party systems used by or for the Borough, metadata, and system generated records maintained in the ordinary course of business.

This notice is issued by me solely in my capacity as a private New Jersey resident exercising statutory and constitutional rights under the New Jersey Constitution, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, the Open Public Records Act, and the common law right of access. No adverse action, retaliation, obstruction, or discriminatory treatment may lawfully result from the exercise of these rights.

If any responsive record is later asserted not to exist, please provide the written certification of non existence required by N.J.S.A. 47:1A-5(g), certifying that a reasonable search was conducted across all systems and departments where responsive records are ordinarily maintained.

This preservation notice does not modify, restart, or toll any statutory response deadlines under OPRA and is issued solely to ensure compliance with existing legal obligations.

This obligation continues through any administrative review or appeal related to these OPRA requests.

Thank you.

John Certo