TOWN OF HACKETTSTOWN
215 W Stiger St
Hackettstown, NJ 07840
(908) 852-3130

Dear Town of Hackettstown:

This is a request for public records made under N.J.S. 47:1A-1 et seq., the New Jersey Open Public Records Act (OPRA) and the common law right of access. Please acknowledge receipt of this message.

BACKGROUND REFERENCES FOR THIS REQUEST

[1] Comstock, Lori. “Hackettstown Slaughterhouse Application Advances, Public Hearing Scheduled.” New Jersey Herald. Accessed December 2, 2020. https://www.njherald.com/story/news/2020....

[2] News Break Hackettstown, NJ. “Hackettstown Council Holding Teleconference Thursday | News Break.” Accessed December 2, 2020. https://www.newsbreak.com/new-jersey/hac....

[3] Wright, Emma. “Proposed Slaughterhouse at the Hackettstown Livestock Auction Drawing Criticism.” WFMZ.com. Accessed December 2, 2020. https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/western-n....

[4] Change.org. “Sign the Petition.” Accessed December 2, 2020. https://www.change.org/p/hackettstown-li....

RECORDS REQUESTED:

For the period January 1, 2014 to the present, all public records including but not limited to communications, meetings, and documents RELATING to the proposed plan(s) to open a slaughterhouse on property on West Stiger Street, Hackettstown, NJ.

THIS REQUEST INCLUDES ALL THE FOLLOWING AVAILABLE PUBLIC RECORDS

[1]. Any and all copies of records, including copies of the Town of Hackettstown's open and closed session meeting minutes relating to the scope of this request;

[2] Audio files in their original format (e.g., dcr format with metadata) of all meetings relating to the scope of this request. If any records are not available electronically, please provide instructions on how they can be obtained.

[3]. Any and all communications between the Mayor and any member of the governing body, or department/person(s) of the Town of Hackettstown;

[4]. Any and all communications between the Mayor and any persons or business entities not employed by the Town of Hackettstown;

[5]. Any and all communications between any employee (pass or present) of the Town of Hackettstown and any persons or business entities not employed by the Town of Hackettstown;

[6]. Any and all applications, presentations, or proposals from any persons or business entities for authorizations, ordinances, resolutions, studies, reports, recommendations, and/or conclusions relating to the scope of this request;

[7]. Any and all agreements, contracts, arrangements, resolutions, or understandings, formal or informal, oral or written, between any member of the Town of Hackettstown and any persons or business entities for studies, reports, recommendations, and conclusions on the subject of this request;

[8]. Any and all intra-, inter-, or extra-departmental public records relating to the scope of this request not captured in items 3 - 8 above.

Please provide all records via electronic file. If any records are not available electronically, please provide instructions on how they can be obtained.

Please complete this request within the statutory period and ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT of this message.

Thank you,
William Sosis, Esq.

DEFINITIONS

"And" and "or" and any other conjunctions or disjunctions used herein shall be read both conjunctively and disjunctively so as to require the production of all public records responsive to this request under New Jersey's Open Public Records Act, and the common law right of access.

"Communication" or "communications" means any and all inquiries, discussions, conferences, conversations, negotiations, agreements, meetings, interviews, telephone conversations, letters correspondence, notes telegrams, facsimiles, electronic mail, memoranda, or other forms of communications, including but not limited to both oral and written communications.

"Document" includes writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, phonorecords, and other data compilations from which information may be obtained. The term encompasses both physical and electronic documents, including electronic mail messages.

"Metadata" means "data about data" and refers to hidden data generated by the use of computer programs, including but not limited to word processing, e-mail, and spreadsheet programs. Metadata, which may reveal information such as document creation date, authorship, distribution, and amendment or annotation, is considered part of the document to which it is attached for purposes of this request.

"Record" includes any information, document, and/or communication that is inscribed on a tangible medium or that is stored in an electronic or other medium.

WILLIAM N. SOSIS, ESQ.
Via Email Only
December 11, 2020

Katharine A. Fina, Esq.
Florio Ferrucci
Steinhardt, Cappelli, Tipton & Taylor LLC
908-454-8300
kfina@floriolaw.com

RE: OPRA Request (12/2/2020) Hackettstown Slaughterhouse Application
Dear Ms. Fina,
I am in receipt of your letter dated December 10, 2020.
I disagree that my OPRA is ”invalid”, ”overly broad” and ”unclear”. For me to further narrow
my request I would need to know, magically and in advance, the type, form, and specific date
created of any record that would satisfy my request. This makes it patently absurd for the
Town of Hackettstown to require me to identify (1) the sender, (2) recipient, (3) subject, (4)
content, (5) and the specific date or range of dates during which any public record related to
my request was created, transmitted, or stored. As such, I consider your letter a thinly veiled
attempt to deny my public records request.

First, it has been nine (9) days since my OPRA request of December 2, 2020. Instead of timely
responding, the Town of Hackettstown chose to ignore my request until the eleventh hour
when the records were due and 3 days prior to the public hearing on the proposed plan to
open a slaughterhouse scheduled for December 15, 2020.
Second, the the cases cited in your letter do not support your claims. It is inapposite for you
to rely on MAG Entertainment, LLC v. Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control, 375 N.J. Super.
534 (App. Div. 2005). The facts are completely different. In MAG, the plaintiff’s request
required that ”the documents or records should set forth the persons and/or parties involved,
the name and citation of each such case, including unreported cases, the dates of filing, hear-
ing and decision, the tribunals or courts involved, the substance of the allegations made, the
docket numbers, the outcome of each matter, the names and addresses of all persons involved,
including all witnesses and counsel, and copies of all pleadings, interrogatory answers, case
documents, expert reports, transcripts, findings, opinions, orders, case resolutions, published
or unpublished case decisions, statutes, rules and regulations.
Clearly then, the MAG plaintiff’s request was ”absurdly overbroad”. The plaintiff’s request
required the records custodian to conduct an ”open-ended demand” requiring the records cus-
todian to, ”manually search through all of the agency’s files, analyze, compile and collate the
information contained therein, and identify cases relative to its selective enforcement defense
in the OAL litigation. Further, once the cases were identified, the records custodian would
then be required to evaluate, sort out, and determine the documents to be produced and those
otherwise exempted.” For these reasons, there is no comparison between my request and the
plaintiff in MAG. Unlike the plaintiff in MAG, my request specifies the time period in which
relevant records may be found. Paff v. Galloway Tp., 229 N.J. 340 (2017). Moreover, when
an OPRA request is confined to a ”discrete and limited subject matter” and ”clearly and rea-
sonably described”, fulfilling the request does not involve any ”research or analysis”, but only
a search for, and production of identifiable government records. Burke v. Brandes, 429 N.J.
Super. 169 (App. Div. 2012). Accordingly, the breadth of my request is as narrow as it can
be since it is confined to a ”discrete and limited subject matter” and it appears that the pro-
posed plan to open a slaughterhouse on the property on West Stiger Street, Hackettstown,
New Jersey dates back to 2014.
Third, Bent v. Stafford Police Dep’t, 381 N.J. Super. 30 (App. Div. 2005), is also wholly
inapposite. In Bent, the requester sought records and information regarding a criminal inves-
tigation of his credit card activities conducted jointly by the Stafford Township Police Depart-
ment (STPD), the United States Attorney for New Jersey and a special agent of the Internal
Revenue Service. As part of his request, Bent sought ”discrete records of the 1992 criminal
investigation conducted by the STPD,” which were fully disclosed. Additionally, he sought a
”[c]opy of contact memos, chain of custody for items removed or turned over to third parties
of signed Grand Jury reports and recommendations.” Bent v. Stafford Twp. Police Dept., GRC
2004-78, final decision (October 14, 2004). Affirming the determination of the Government
Records Council, the court stated: ”to the extent Bent’s request was for RECORDS THAT
EITHER DID NOT EXIST OR WERE NOT IN THE CUSTODIAN’S POSSESSION, there
was, of necessity, no denial of access at all.” Burnett v. County of Gloucester, 415 N.J. Super.
506, 516 (App. Div. 2010)(quoting Bent at 38). In contrast, the public records I seek are all
withing the exclusive control and course of the Town of Hackettstown’s official business.
By the same token, your last case bears no resemblance to the my December 2, 2020 OPRA
request. In that case the requestor submitted a five-page document listing thirty-eight sepa-
rate requests. New Jersey Builders Ass’n v. New Jersey Council on Affordable Housing, 390
N.J. Super. 166 (App. Div. 2007). The plaintiff’s request also required the records custodian
to describe the documents and data sought as those ”used” or ”considered” by COAH or ”sup-
port[ing],” ”demonstrat[ing],” ”justif[ying]” or ”verif[ying]” various determinations relevant to
COAH’s determinations about fair-share housing obligations. Id. at 172.

You should also note that decisions by the GRC are not binding in Superior Court. In 2017
the New Jersey Supreme Court held that courts do not accord substantial deference to GRC
decisions. Additionally, under OPRA, a decision of the GRC has no value as a precedent for
any case initiated in Superior Court.” N.J.S.A. 47:1A-7(e). Besides, the New Jersey Legislature
has instructed that government records must be readily accessible to our citizenry, subject to
certain exceptions, and that any limitation on the public’s right of access must be construed
in favor of access. N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1.
Finally, I find it irresponsible for the Town of Hackettstown to take a litigious position against
a citizen making a reasonable request for public records. As you know, when a public entity
engages in such conduct it risks wasting public funds through needless litigation. Therefore,
as an amicable alternative, please inform your client that I am amenable to a reasonable
extension of time should he require it.
Very truly yours,
William N. Sosis, Esq.

cc: William W. Kuster, Jr.: Via Online OPRAMACHINE.COM