I have once again lost an RTK appeal

This takes my record to 1-2

Well, Exeter, once again, in the pursuit of truth, I have jousted with the noted legal scholar and barrister J. Chadwick Schnee, and come up on the down side of the decision.

Back on January 24th, I sought through the Right to Know process, “all emails between the…Township Supervisors and the [T]ownship Solicitor from April 22nd to April 25th 2022, in relation to any conversation concerning the [v]acancy Board/Chair, and all replies.” The Township denied the request, citing that it fell under the attorney/client privilege (as everything in Exeter does since the Chadmeister has been here). I appealed with the Office of Open Records, granted OOR an additional extension and received my determination yesterday. Denied.

What I sought, per the evidence that I submitted, “The email I am looking for is between Chadwick Schnee, Exeter’s Solicitor, the five board members, George Bell, Michelle Kircher, Dave Hughes, DiannaReeser, and Carl Staples, Exeter (RTK ) officer Tina Stephens, and the acting township manager, Clarencem Hamm.” The OOR denied my appeal after an in camera review (used to allow a judicial official to view “sensitive” materials). Their decision is based on an interpretation of what a lawyer does that is indeed very broad, and leads to nearly anything a lawyer types to be THEIR work product. From the decision, “The attorney work-product doctrine, on the other hand, prohibits disclosure ‘of the mental impressions of a party’s attorney or his or her conclusions, opinions, memoranda, notes or summaries, legal research or legal theories’ .”

That broad definition leads to the insanity of Chad sharing his grandmother’s brownie recipe with Jack Piho being “attorney work-product”. It is a clear attempt by the governmental structure to keep information out of the hands of the people who pay for the “services” that government provides.

The decision goes on to state, “The (attorney) work-product doctrine is designed to provide protection against adversarial parties.” Did you get that? We the people are an “adversarial party” to our own township government. This is the official position of the OOR, an arm of Pennsylvania state government. We’re in trouble, folks.

So once again, Exeter Township government chooses to NOT give you information you are entitled to have, by virtue of the fact that you pay for every move these people make. Information concerning the backroom workings of the local government you pay for. When Piho and Hamm were elected, it was under the promise of “more transparency”. Unfortunately what we’ve gotten is, “meet the new boss, same as the old boss”. But now it is sanctioned by the Commonwealth as the people being the adversary. Does it clear up why you don’t know anything about what’s going on in township government until it’s already occurred?

If we can’t get basic information, like the content of an innocuous email, about the inner workings of our government, imagine the shady moves that are going on in the deep background.

What are they trying to hide?
We’ll keep digging.