HOULTON, Maine — For the third time in less than a year, a resident has filed a complaint in Aroostook County Superior Court against the town of Houlton for allegedly violating the state’s Freedom of Access Act.
The town, the Houlton Police Department and Police Chief Tim DeLuca are named in the complaint.
Last week, Mark Lipscombe filed a petition for judicial review under Maine’s Rule 80B — challenging an action by a government agency — after the police department allegedly failed to complete his request for documents related to a police interaction with his child.
The documents did not detail the interaction to protect the child, Lipscombe said.
“Two months of stonewalling and cherry-picked document production isn’t how public agencies should operate,” Lipscombe said on Wednesday. “If the police department’s interaction with my child was appropriate, they should have no problem releasing the records. Their behavior suggests otherwise.”
Lipscombe’s Superior Court complaint comes on the heels of another legal filing by a resident regarding a townwide system of surveillance cameras. Houlton resident Craig Harriman, who was trying to get answers about camera use, locations, data storage, privacy protections and cost, sued the town twice for alleged Freedom of Access Act violations regarding requests for information.
Harriman did not prevail in the first filing. According to District Court Judge Robert Langner, the town did not initially respond to Harriman’s written queries for the records, but because most of the documents were eventually provided, the town did not violate the state’s FOAA laws.
Lipscombe submitted a detailed FOAA request to DeLuca, seeking all records related to the interaction with his child, including investigative records, dispatch logs, reports, body camera footage and related documentation.
The complaint alleges that, after 52 days of delay, missed required deadlines, shifting justifications and deficient document production, the town and police improperly withheld records concerning his own minor child’s interaction with law enforcement based on legally insufficient exemption claims.
“Rather than conducting the diligent search required by FOAA, defendants appear to have cherry-picked certain documents while remaining silent on numerous categories of requested records,” Lipscombe said in the court documents.
Lipscombe was seeking all investigative records related to the interaction, including dispatch logs, reports and body camera footage.
The town declined to comment on a list of Bangor Daily News questions, including why the records were not released to a minor’s parent and the town’s policy for addressing FOAA requests.
In early July, DeLuca allegedly missed two promised deadlines regarding response timelines and then referred the request to legal counsel, despite Lipscombe’s repeated offers to narrow or tailor his FOAA request to facilitate prompt processing, according to the court filing.
By mid-July, 48 days after the initial FOAA request, an attorney for the town responded to Lipscombe and said many of the records he requested contained confidential information.
The body camera footage was withheld and other documents were heavily redacted, even removing Lipscombe’s name, his minor child’s name and date of birth.
“The HPDs pattern of delays, missed deadlines and secrecy suggest they are more interested in avoiding scrutiny than serving the public,” Lipscombe said. “When law enforcement claims they can’t redact body camera footage in 2025, it’s either incompetence or willful obstruction of transparency.”
Lipscombe’s lawsuit asks the court to order the town to immediately produce all records related to his FOAA request, provide unredacted or appropriately redacted versions of records and award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, court records show.
After service of the complaint is returned, the town will file a statement of reasons with the court before a hearing date is set.
