Title: Dean Matt 8/21/2026 Public records request exhibit in the agenda

From:	Dean Matt
To:	Vivian Carvalho; Marisa Powers; Kwame Jackson; Steve Heitzner; Greg Selep; Steve Swanson; Scott Huebner
Cc:	Rob Schlingmann; jrassett@universitypark-fl.com
Subject:	Public records request exhibit in the agenda
Date:	Friday, August 21, 2026 1:10:04 PM

ALERT: This message is from an external source.BE CAUTIOUS before clicking any link or attachment

Couple things:
1.
I submitted 2 or 3 the requests this week that have a) not yet been acknowledged and b) are not reflected in the agenda as of today.
(As a point of reference when you send a Public Records Request to the county of Manatee, it’s acknowledged immediately in 10 nanoseconds seconds)
What is being done to compress calendar time in acknowledgement from an average of a week to a few hours? Many requests are time sensitive. (Remember, we had one in 2924 that took 3 months to complete and another that took 7 months. Delays like this don’t inspire confidence that the ultimate response provided is accurate and complete. Residents reach the conclusion that UPRD is hiding something when simple requests are internally filtered?
2.
If the purpose of the list is to insinuate that these requests consume a lot of legal expense and for residents to direct outrage at those submitting requests then it is probably serving that purpose.
But that is just UPRD propaganda to encourage [non-critical, lazy thinking] residents to reach that conclusion which you apparently want them to reach.
What may give a more objective picture is to add a column showing Records Request Fees paid by the requestor.
By showing that, readers may consider more objective and consequential issues like:
why are there so many requests and why are so many actions of UPRD being investigated, especially when requestors must use their own treasure to compel responses?
Here the reader may be reminded that where there’s smoke there’s fire and had this been in place, it may have accelerated resident ( and supervisor) demand for a governance committee to be in place years ago.
by showing the amount of fees paid ( and Personally, I think I paid over $10,000 over the past few years) the reader will be reminded that these requests are cash neutral to UPRD as the requestor is paying the fee for extensive searches.
So, if you want the reader to draw objective conclusions from this summary, I recommend you add the suggested additional column of information.

If, however, you want the reader to reach the conclusion you appear to want to propagate, ( I.e., demonizing the requestor by painting a false picture that these requests are unduly costing UPRD legal fees), then make no changes and keep doing what you’re doing.
As for non-extensive searches, residents are entitled to request whatever, whenever because of the form of government that residents petitioned for in 2018 so this is just the cost of business and requestors should not be purposefully demonized for their requests, as is so blatantly and obviously your intent here.
Finally, to reduce the amount of Records Requested, can I suggest that the Board and attorneys following the rule of law and acting ethically and in accordance with Our Core values. The theory of Public Records requests is that elected officials, knowing they are subject to having their documents/correspondence etc. exposed, will act ethically and with integrity at all times.
That’s the theory at least.
When UPRD acts as fiduciaries with transparency and when trust is rebuilt, the number of public records requests should plummet.
We’re not there yet.
A governance committee made up of objective, ethical residents who are tasked to make sure UPRD is acting lawfully and ethically in accordance with Our Core Values and the rule of law will also help. (Currently, there is a big void here as our attorneys have offered no help in this area. Too often they have participated in helping UPRD circumvent the rule of law and acting as enablers to bad actors).
On the topic if Governance Committee, residents can’t be more disappointed by Swanson’s and UPRD’s actions at the last meeting:
There were 5 candidates that submitted their expressions of interest. One was deemed by I is to have only been interested in the Strat Planning committee. That determination is subject and residents are skeptical due to the many well-documented nefarious action by UPRD.
So then Swanson decides the best course is to solicit more expressions of interest. This is getting old. How many times have you opened the window for Suoervusirs and
Committee members when you dislike the residents who have indicated they are willing to serve? This is virtue signaling and more Theatrics… not a serious effort to add the governance when we all know we need it.
Swanson just wants friendly folks on board who will just look the other way and hand out hall passes and get out of jail free cards instead of adding sorely-needed accountability then let’s just cut to the chase guys: just add the washed up folks from the PBM management committee and select Dickson, Murphy, and Bob Wood. If they aren’t available, maybe reach out to defamers Mantia and Cantarella. Steve- I’m sure any of these folks will be able to water down the effectiveness of the governance committee for you.
If, however you are serious and want to fix Vivian’s mistake, then appoint the five folks who

met the original deadline. Doing anything else is unethical and disingenuous.
Dean Matt 630.248.0646
The 48-48-48 Pickleball Challenge:
Https://Mucho-Dean-Aero.com/the-pickleball-challenge Gone To Pot book: Https://GoneToPotBook.com
GolfGearGolf Accessories: Https://GolfGear.Golf