I’ll point out right up front here that I am not a lawyer.

However, I am not sure that it takes a lawyer to make a quick tour through the initial claims and counterclaims by the Town of Groton and its chosen developer for the former Mystic Oral School property to see that the town may be in a deep legal hole.

Indeed, as the souring deal slides toward what seems like an inevitable, expensive slog through the courts, Groton Town Manager John Burt has already battened down the hatches and refused to release to the public the latest letter from the lawyer for the developer, Jeffrey Respler.

An attorney for neighbors opposed to the development calls Burt’s reasons for refusing to release the fresh letter, the town manager’s claim of exemption from Freedom of Information laws, “utter nonsense.”

Just imagine what the letter says and how embarrassing it must be for the people who got the town into a complicated deal with a developer who pleaded guilty to bribing public officials in New York and who hasn’t finished one of his principal Connecticut projects after more than 10 years of trying.

“It’s exceedingly concerning that the Town of Groton, through you, has decided to erect such a flimsy, unlawful excuse for depriving access to a public record,” attorney Edward Moukawsher, representing the neighbors, wrote to Burt, with a long legal explanation as to why the document is public.

“It may be convenient for the Town of Groton to avoid any scrutiny in this matter, but it is clearly contrary to law and the antithesis of transparency,” Moukawsher wrote.

Burt, who doesn’t take my calls, told a reporter for The Day that he talked to someone from the Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission who told him he had a “strong case” for withholding the letter.

Even if the town manager is right, and he can make a case for exemptions to FOI law, why should he? The FOI laws don’t require you to claim exemptions, just provide allowances for documents that don’t necessarily have to be made public.

So what is he hiding? What could be in the letter, presumably outlining the developer’s case against the town, that the public should not see?

There is no litigation yet. Provisions in the town contract with Respler call for negotiations and arbitration before litigation, but none of that has begun.

The agreement says negotiations, when they begin, should be conducted confidentially, except as precluded by FOI laws. Moukawsher already has written a clear legal opinion as to why this letter should be disclosed under FOI law.

It seems clear to me, even without any legal training, that the first letter from the developer’s lawyer points out a pretty good reason why his client might ultimately prevail in a lawsuit.

It turns out, incredibly, the town’s agreement with Respler promises that the town will change the zoning for the oral school property to accommodate the project.

Of course it can’t, because the Planning & Zoning Commission has said it won’t.

It’s true that the agreement also points out that the town can’t make assurances about necessary permits and approvals.

But then there is this clear promise: “Town shall be responsible for amending its zoning regulations to provide for and permit, subject to reasonable conditions and approvals, the development contemplated in this agreement.”

Wow.

This concise pledge was featured prominently in the developer’s lawyer’s first letter. We don’t know what he says in his second.

But the town lawyers who signed off on that promise in the agreement are now going to have to bill taxpayers a lot of money to try to wiggle out of it. They are also telling town officials we shouldn’t see that next letter. Must be embarrassing for them, too.

Moukawsher threatens in his letter to Burt to file a complaint with the FOI commission. He can get in line. I’ve already filed one about the town’s refusal to comply with FOI laws.

I was told by Groton lead planner Jonathan Reiner that there is “no paper file, per se.” Really? The records are largely electronic and it will take months to review them all, he said.

Moukawsher and I might eventually prevail, but it will be a long time before the commission takes up any of these complaints.

There will be an election before then, and hopefully voters will render the right decision then.

This is the opinion of David Collins.

d.collins@theday.com