By Mike Donoghue, Senior Correspondent
Woodstock residents are not being permitted to read the investigative report they are paying for concerning management concerns within the village police department.
Municipal Manager Eric Duffy, in a letter to the Vermont Standard, denied the newspaper’s request for access to the report on behalf of the community.
Duffy hired private detective William Burgess of Lebanon, N.H. on Oct. 25 to investigate unknown concerns reportedly raised by Woodstock Police employees about the operation of the department under Chief Joe Swanson.
Duffy has said Burgess filed his 17-page investigative report last month. It was later shared with the five-member Village Board of Trustees, Duffy’s boss.
But the public is being left in the dark — at least for the time being.
The Vermont Standard filed a request for access to the report, in part, because the newspaper believes the substantial public interest in the findings far outweigh any claim of secrecy made by the village.
The contract called for Burgess to investigate “Complaints by several employees of the Woodstock Police Department regarding the activities, behavior and administration practices of Police Chief Joe Swanson.”
It also asked Burgess to follow up on “Other complaints that may arise out of the initial complaints noted above.”
Duffy has yet to indicate if the employee complaints go back only to when Swanson was named police chief in July 2023 or if they include previous years, including his time as sergeant and second in command.
While claiming secrecy should prevail, Duffy also cited a pending lawsuit filed against him as manager and the village by Woodstock lawyer Nicholas “Nico” Seldon.
Seldon, who is married to Swanson, filed his lawsuit on the grounds that Duffy and the village have violated the Vermont Public Records Act by improperly withholding other documents about unrelated issues.
While citing the Seldon lawsuit, Duffy did not indicate whether the records requested by the Standard have been turned over during the regular pre-trial discovery process in the Seldon case.
Duffy also wrote that he is refusing to release the report on grounds that he believes “the document is a communication that is preliminary to policy or action and exempt” under state law known as “the deliberative process.”
The manager said he sought legal advice before denying access.
Duffy did not respond earlier this week to phone and text messages seeking additional explanation for his written denial.
Seton McIlroy, chair of the Village Trustees, said there was nothing new to report from the board.
It is unclear how much the final bill for the report will cost local taxpayers. The contract, which was signed Oct. 25, said Burgess would charge the Village $150 an hour, plus some expenses.
Duffy told the Vermont Standard it had the right to appeal his records denial. Duffy, in his letter, also maintained he was the person that would handle any appeal.
“You may appeal this decision to me, as head of the agency. If you do appeal, I ask that you please outline your objections and your reasoning, for my consideration in deciding the appeal,” Duffy wrote.
Standard Managing Editor Tess Hunter said the newspaper was more likely to appeal to Duffy’s boss, the Village Trustees, instead of asking the manager to overturn his own written decision.
The Standard first asked for the police report and other records on Dec. 20.
Duffy initially said he would ask for a 10-day extension to respond to the Standard’s request because he was going on vacation. When told “vacation” was not a legal excuse under the law for an extension, Village Attorney Matt Bloomer suggested a delay was needed to find the requested records.
The Standard responded that it would put on hold all the requested records except for the Burgess report, which should be readily available.
Now, with the denial of the Burgess report by Duffy, the Standard reinstated its pending request for the other public records on Tuesday.
Under Vermont law, the requested police report is normally considered public information.
A state judge ordered the town of Stowe to pay $20,000 in legal fees in November 2023 to the Stowe Reporter newspaper after the municipality improperly withheld a police report.
Judge Daniel Richardson noted it was an accountability case of “Who watches the watchmen?”
The Burlington law firm Stitzel, Page & Fletcher, which also represents the village of Woodstock, was on the losing end of the Stowe records case.
Stowe also had to pay Stitzel, Page & Fletcher roughly $27,000 in fees and expenses to unsuccessfully defend the case.
Vermont public law was amended several years ago to provide legal fees when government officials unlawfully withhold records that are considered public property. Until then, legal fees were discretionary for the judge, not mandatory.
Burlington lawyer Matthew Byrne of Gravel and Shea won the case for the Stowe newspaper.
“I think the most important thing to preserve is the judge’s opinion, which preserves the right to know,” Byrne told the Stowe Reporter.
Meanwhile Chief Swanson began on Tuesday his 13th week on paid administrative leave from the police department. Taxpayers have paid him about $25,000 not to work.
“Chief Swanson continues to wait patiently for the Village of Woodstock to finalize its investigation,” according to his lawyer William Vasiliou of Middlebury.
“While the process remains ongoing, Chief Swanson remains compliant with the requirements governing his police certification as well as train for his job as a law enforcement officer,” Vasiliou said.
Duffy initially placed Swanson on paid leave on Oct. 15 while a traffic incident on High Street was investigated by the Vermont State Police.
The focus of that investigation were two drivers, including Seldon, the chief’s husband, and neither of them apparently willing to yield on the narrow street, officials said. A confrontation ensued.
Swanson was reported as a possible witness, so the village manager placed the chief on leave and asked for state police to take over the investigation, which had been started by Woodstock Police.
Initial police reports indicated claims of a possible assault and damage to one car, but, in the end, both drivers refused to cooperate by giving sworn statements, state police said.
The state police investigation did show Swanson may have been more than a witness and that he interceded as the two men clashed, Detective Capt. Scott Dunlap reported. He said no charges would be sought.
After being given the results on Nov. 5 by state police, Duffy has kept the chief on paid leave.
Duffy has only said repeatedly he was “going through the process” without any elaboration to taxpayers.
The Vermont Standard learned Duffy had met behind closed doors with Village Trustees in mid-October to say he had heard complaints about the operation of the police department. Duffy said he wanted to hire a private detective to investigate the employee concerns.
After the Burgess investigation began, the local union for the Woodstock Police Officers issued a unanimous “no confidence” vote in Swanson.
The local union for the Woodstock Emergency Dispatchers also issued a unanimous “no confidence” vote in the chief.
The two local unions sent Duffy a joint letter on Nov. 20, one day after their votes, indicating they hoped Swanson would be replaced as chief.
Meanwhile, the Village Trustees have taken no public action concerning Duffy following at least three complaints being circulated in the community.