Through this lawsuit, PDDG is seeking access to ten documents identified as missing and probably destroyed by the Town of Geneseo. As records of the Town of Geneseo produced by or for the Town, these documents are part of the public record and are not properly exempt from public disclosure through the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL). Beyond our general interest in developing a record of the origins and review of Newman Development Group's Gateway Town Center (GTC) proposal, these eight documents are of specific interest due to the parties they involve and when they were produced. The numbers in parenthesis represent the original numbering of the requests for 36 town documents.

(3) March 24, 2005: Email correspondence from James Coniglio to T. Ferrera and D. Jerum (partners of the Developer through their firm Ferrera/Jerum) regarding formal submittal of application;
(4.) March 26, 2005: Email from James Coniglio to D. Jerum and T. Ferrara regarding submittal issues;
These documents were produced as Newman's Gateway Town Center proposal was first being made public. As correspondence between the Town and the firm through which the GTC project was first proposed, these documents may provide information about the origins of this proposal and the expectations for its review;

(7.) April 21, 2005: Correspondence from K. Kamlet (in-house attorney for the Developer) to James Coniglio;
(8.) April 21, 2005: Correspondence from James Coniglio to K. Kamlet;
These two documents were produced in the period during which the Planned Development District (PDD) Law was being drafted and discussed. The PDD Law is critical to the GTC proposal in that the proposal is far too large to be permitted under the existing zoning of the Gateway District. Enacting the PDD Law allowed this proposal to be reviewed. Understanding the circumstances behind the development and enactment of that law, as these documents may help us to do, is thus critical to understanding the relationship between the Town and Newman in the development of the PDD law.

(11.) October 21, 2005: Correspondence from applicant's counsel (presumably K. Kamlet) to James Coniglio;
(12.) October 25, 2005: Correspondence from applicant's counsel (presumably K. Kamlet) to James Coniglio;
These two documents were produced in the days prior to the formal submission of Newman's Gateway Town Center proposal. The PDD Law had been passed in July 2005, after which Newman revised and completed its proposal. These documents may provide information related to the submission of Newman's application.

(15.) December 2, 2005: Correspondence of James Coniglio with N. Madden;
Neal Madden is an attorney for Harter, Secrest, which represented Wal-Mart during the review of its SuperCenter proposal by the Village of Geneseo. This correspondence, written the week before the Town Board accepted Newman's application and forwarded it to the Town Planning Board to begin environmental impact analyis (required by the State Environmental Quality Review Act) review may provide information related to the Town's plans for SEQRA of the GTC proposal.

(16.) December 13, 2005: Correspondence of K. Kamlet to Ronald G. Hull;
This correspondence was written the day after the Town Planning Board accepted lead agency status and initiated SEQRA review of the GTC proposal. Ron Hull was the attorney representing the Town Planning Board at the time. This document may provide information related to Newman's plans for the SEQRA review of their proposal.

(33.) May 17, 2006: Correspondence of K. Kamlet to James Coniglio;
This correspondence was produced during the Livingston County Planning Board's review of Newman's proposal. That review had resulted in some unanticipated difficulties for Newman's proposal and some required modifications. This document may provide information related to Newman's response to those difficulties.

(35.) July 19, 2006: Letter from T. Lucey of APD Engineering (consultant to the developer)
This letter was apparently written by Mr. Lucey, engineer for Newman, to the Town of Geneseo. It was written during the Town Planning Board's review of the GTC proposal and may provide information related to the dynamics between the Town Board, the Town Planning, and Newman during this period.