The town of Houlton asked the Aroostook County Superior Court this week to dismiss a recently filed Freedom of Access Act lawsuit, claiming it has complied with Maine law. The petitioner disputed the claim Friday.
Resident Craig Harriman sued Houlton in September, claiming officials did not release all the public documents he requested related to the town’s controversial facial recognition surveillance cameras that were removed earlier this year.
Houlton is no stranger to resident lawsuits alleging the town “cherry picks” documents for FOAA requests while withholding or remaining silent about others. Harriman’s Friday response is the latest chapter in the years-long saga surrounding the town’s surveillance cameras.
The town alleged this week that it never denied Harriman’s request, that it has supplied him with all requested documents and that any omissions were inadvertent.
The suit was Harriman’s third Rule 80B appeal, which is a Superior Court filing to challenge actions taken by government agencies. He alleged that each time he sought to enforce his right to inspect government records under Maine law, the town gave no lawful reason for failing to produce data he had requested multiple times.
The town’s document denials do not cite a lawful exemption as required by Maine law, demonstrating a pattern of noncompliance, he said.
In his most recent court action, Harriman specifically directed his public records request to Police Chief Tim DeLuca. He sought all 2021 electronic communications between DeLuca and former town information technology employee Scott Rossignol concerning the purchase, testing and installation of town surveillance cameras and school cameras.
The town omitted DeLuca’s responsive emails to Rossignol, never provided a written exemption explanation and never confirmed in writing that DeLuca’s account, servers and archives were searched, according to Harriman.
“On August 26, 2026, the town wrote that ‘the request was fulfilled.’ That is a written refusal of the remaining statutory demands,” Harriman said.
In addition to Maine law, the town is held under a more stringent public records obligation to Harriman, bound by a 2025 settlement agreement between Harriman, Mark Lipscombe and Patrick Bruce.
After months of negotiation, the Houlton Town Council approved the agreement in October 2025 regarding the removal of controversial surveillance cameras equipped with facial recognition technology.
The three men alleged the town unlawfully possessed and used facial recognition technology in violation of Maine law and were prepared to sue the town seeking a temporary restraining order and permanent injunctive relief regarding the town’s use of the technology, the settlement alleges.
Prior to the settlement, Harriman, Lipscombe and Bruce each filed multiple Freedom of Access Act requests related to the cameras. Bruce told the Town Council in January 2025 that the use of facial recognition technology violated Maine’s strict facial surveillance law.
As part of the settlement agreement, the town was required to produce documents related to all outstanding public records requests from the men, which included Harriman’s, within 30 days. For any documents not produced, the town was mandated to accompany the response with an affidavit detailing a diligent search for the record requested.
The town did not produce all of Harriman’s requested documents and they did not supply search documentation, he said.
“Calling omitted records ‘inadvertent’ does not convert that refusal into compliance,” Harriman said. “Chief DeLuca’s November 24, 2025, statement that all responsive documents had been provided cannot be treated as a completed search.”
The town claimed it has given Harriman all the documents. Harriman disagreed, saying he repeatedly wrote to DeLuca and Interim Town Manager Nancy Ketch requesting the missing documents and received none.
Additionally, Harriman attended several Town Council meetings to express his frustration and request the missing documents. He shared his FOAA requests and town response with each councilor.
Ketch told Harriman in an Aug. 26 email that he had received all the documents related to his request.
“I am sorry if some items you previously received from the first distribution were not included in the second distribution,” she wrote. “As I previously stated, all records were reviewed internally and in good faith to obtain the requested documents. Any missing documents provided from the second request were inadvertent. Again, you have received all documents from the Town, so the request was fulfilled.”
Harriman is asking the court to declare that Houlton violated the Maine Freedom of Access Act and order the immediate production of all the remaining records he has requested.
He is also asking the court to order the town to confirm in writing that they completed a thorough search of DeLuca’s email account, relevant town and police servers and archives related to the documents he requested.
