Citizen Portal
Sign In

Resident says closed‑session letter was disclosed and attached to $3.7M tort claim; asks council for explanation

Mayor and Council of Princeton, New Jersey · December 23, 2025

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Felicia Spitz told the council a letter she provided for closed session was disclosed without consent, attached to a tort claim seeking $3.7 million, and that municipal counsel declined to explain; she asked for a response by Jan. 26, 2026 and said she would refer the matter to the state's DCA Office of Local Government Services if unanswered.

Felicia Spitz (5 Haslet Avenue) used the public comment period to raise governance concerns about the municipality's handling of a letter she had provided for closed session. Spitz said the letter was disclosed without her consent, was attached to a tort claim notice seeking $3,700,000 in damages against the Princeton Housing Authority and the municipality, and that she had expected the document to remain confidential.

Spitz said she asked who authorized the disclosure and the legal basis for it. According to Spitz, the municipality's attorney, Kevin Van Hise, "declined to provide that information and in all irony indicated the answer is not available for disclosure." Spitz said the absence of an explanation increased her concern about OPMA compliance, preservation of privilege and governance protocols and requested a written response by Jan. 26, 2026. She said that if the council did not respond satisfactorily she would seek assistance from the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs' Office of Local Government Services.

The meeting transcript records the allegation, the dollar amount referenced in Spitz's remarks and her request for a substantive response. There is no recorded council response to the questions during the meeting. The complaint as stated raises potential legal and governance questions that municipal officials may need to address in a subsequent public record or in closed session with appropriate notice and legal counsel.

No municipal response is recorded in the transcript; the record shows Spitz asked for clarification and indicated possible escalation if she did not receive a timely response.