Herbst letter to the Big 12 expressing UConn's interest

[auggie22]

I don't think we are wound tight here. This is such a heavily orchestrated process so as not to divulge any information to the public. But no matter how well managed, there are clues to be found. This feels like a seam that can expose some real information, if we knew how to do it.

 

[FDNY99]

StorrsSouth had this on twitter last night

 

[UConn Dan]

I don't think we are wound tight here. This is such a heavily orchestrated process so as not to divulge any information to the public. But no matter how well managed, there are clues to be found. This feels like a seam that can expose some real information, if we knew how to do it.

The devil is in the details.

 

[UCONN in OKC]

I was just puzzling over this at dinner. Two possibilities: 1.) UCONN out of loop and thus the deviation from instructions, or 2.) UCONN has a personal back door into the process.

Figure that one out, and we know our fate.

There could be a 3rd option,

Letter written to commissioner, but enveloped to Lawyer

 

[HuskyHawk]

There could be a 3rd option,

Letter written to commissioner, but enveloped to Lawyer

No, no, no. That misses the point. Except for BYU these are all public schools subject to FOIA. Bowlsby is sending his emails saying, have your General Counsel contact my lawyer. Now that communication is governed by attorney client privilege on both sides and we don't get yahoos like this posting it on Twitter. A letter from Susan to their lawyer accomplishes nothing.

So what we are seeing here, in each case, are the preliminary letters to Bowlsby. Then he contacts each school and says...hey don't write to me, send it to Polsinelli in KC, and send it from your GC. That ensures that a bunch of CR nuts like us don't go into a frenzy over the actual, meaningful content. Yet here we are anyway.

None of these letters mean anything. They are all merely the initial "expression of interest in joining" from each school that then triggers Bob's emails.

 

[FDNY99]

No, no, no. That misses the point. Except for BYU these are all public schools subject to FOIA. Bowlsby is sending his emails saying, have your General Counsel contact my lawyer. Now that communication is governed by attorney client privilege on both sides and we don't get yahoos like this posting it on Twitter. A letter from Susan to their lawyer accomplishes nothing.

So what we are seeing here, in each case, are the preliminary letters to Bowlsby. Then he contacts each school and says...hey don't write to me, send it to Polsinelli in KC, and send it from your GC. That ensures that a bunch of CR nuts like us don't go into a frenzy over the actual, meaningful content. Yet here we are anyway.

None of these letters mean anything. They are all merely the initial "expression of interest in joining" from each school that then triggers Bob's emails.

But they do in a sense...because then the bozo's who call themselves journalists..the ones like McMurphy who have been touting schools like Memphis (and no I don't think C. Austin Cox is a journalist) would be posting letters from a school such as Memphis. So far the ONLY communication we have seen from FOIA institutions are Cincy, Houston and UConn. All dated around a similar date. Where are the others?

 

[CallMeBruce]

No, no, no. That misses the point. Except for BYU these are all public schools subject to FOIA. Bowlsby is sending his emails saying, have your General Counsel contact my lawyer. Now that communication is governed by attorney client privilege on both sides

This isn't true. Attorney/Client privilege only applies to communications between the attorney and the client. Once it's been sent to a third-party, it's no longer privileged.

 

[MattMang23]

Is it not possible that the letter was not snail mailed but, rather, emailed to the recipient? Who mails stuff nowadays?

She could have just written Bowlsby's address on the letter then emailed it to both the attorney and the Commissioner.

 

[jostar1]

But they do in a sense...because then the bozo's who call themselves journalists..the ones like McMurphy who have been touting schools like Memphis (and no I don't think C. Austin Cox is a journalist) would be posting letters from a school such as Memphis. So far the ONLY communication we have seen from FOIA institutions are Cincy, Houston and UConn. All dated around a similar date. Where are the others?

We saw the letter from USF:
USF letter to Big 12 Commissioner-Bob-Bowlsby

 

[jostar1]

But they do in a sense...because then the bozo's who call themselves journalists..the ones like McMurphy who have been touting schools like Memphis (and no I don't think C. Austin Cox is a journalist) would be posting letters from a school such as Memphis. So far the ONLY communication we have seen from FOIA institutions are Cincy, Houston and UConn. All dated around a similar date. Where are the others?

Here is the letter Colorado State sent. They addressed it to the Big 12 Conference address and to the Big 12's lawyer.
http://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/csu/2016/08/24/csu-pitch-big-12/89264410/

 

[HuskyHawk]

This isn't true. Attorney/Client privilege only applies to communications between the attorney and the client. Once it's been sent to a third-party, it's no longer privileged.

Yes, I phrased it badly. Not trying to over-lawyer this. But in improves the chances that it would be considered Attorney Work Product.

 

[jostar1]

Boise State letter (does not use the "expressing interest" language):
Boise State makes pitch to Big 12 Conference

 

[CL82]

This isn't true. Attorney/Client privilege only applies to communications between the attorney and the client. Once it's been sent to a third-party, it's no longer privileged.

I would expect that communications between attorneys aren't subject to FOIA.

 

[CL82]

Boise State letter (does not use the "expressing interest" language):
Boise State makes pitch to Big 12 Conference

That's a brutal second paragraph/sentence.

 

[NYUConn]

I would expect that communications between attorneys aren't subject to FOIA.

If one or more of the attorneys are state employees, they likely are. Especially if it's not in a trial setting.

 

[CL82]

If one or more of the attorneys are state employees, they likely are. Especially if it's not in a trial setting.

Yep, I was thinking outside counsel, but the reference was to general counsel.

Took a quick look - it seems like they'd need to fall in one of these boxes to avoid FOIA:

Exemption 5: Privileged communications within or between agencies, including:

1. Deliberative Process Privilege
2. Attorney-Work Product Privilege
3. Attorney-Client Privilege

Maybe Deliberative Process Privilege?

 

[HuskyHawk]

Yep, I was thinking outside counsel, but the reference was to general counsel.

Took a quick look - it seems like they'd need to fall in one of these boxes to avoid FOIA:

Exemption 5: Privileged communications within or between agencies, including:

1. Deliberative Process Privilege
2. Attorney-Work Product Privilege
3. Attorney-Client Privilege

Maybe Deliberative Process Privilege?

Yeah, and I'm not suggesting they'd even survive a challenge. Really I was thinking more that the Big 12 wanted this stuff under-wraps long enough to get it done before disclosure. So even the ability to claim an Exemption would buy them time.

I don't deal with FOIA stuff, but my understanding is that somebody requests. You respond within a certain time, and can without certain exempt materials. Then the requester has to challenge that exemption, and you can fight that, etc. It buys time at a minimum.

 

[NYUConn]

Yeah, and I'm not suggesting they'd even survive a challenge. Really I was thinking more that the Big 12 wanted this stuff under-wraps long enough to get it done before disclosure. So even the ability to claim an Exemption would buy them time.

I don't deal with FOIA stuff, but my understanding is that somebody requests. You respond within a certain time, and can without certain exempt materials. Then the requester has to challenge that exemption, and you can fight that, etc. It buys time at a minimum.

I looked this up a few weeks back and the CT State open Record laws only indicate that the state most respond within a "reasonable" time frame. No actual timeline is laid out, which is helpful to the state in dodging open record requests.

Also helpful is that the penalty for not fulfilling an open-record request is only a couple hundred bucks.

Both give UConn less of an incentive to play ball with reporter requests in any kind of timely manner to your point.

 

[huskymedic]

Boise State letter (does not use the "expressing interest" language):
Boise State makes pitch to Big 12 Conference

That looks like - "hey, everyone else is going to the party, let's invite ourselves".

 

[SubbaBub]

I still don't get why people interested in seeing UConn move would gum up the works with an FOIA request.

We know their are working on it. Stay out of it.