Brad Foerster Files FOIA Appeal to President Grasso for University of Michigan Russia-Gate Documents
President Grasso, University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
presoff@umich.edu
SENT VIA EMAIL
November 18, 2025
RE: Appeal For Constructive Denial of University of Michigan FOIA Request 260537 For UM OGC Christine Gerdes Russia-Gate Documents Referring to Bradley Foerster and/or Myria Petrou
Dear President Grasso,
I am writing to appeal the constructive denial for my October 22, 2025 FOIA request, FOIA 2060537 requesting “a copy of any and all documentation (including investigations, complaints, reports, statements, affidavits, transcripts, notes, emails, etc.) regarding a Russian scheme to subvert the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election/Russia-Gate in Christine Gerdes’ (or her assistants) file/documentation regarding/referring to me and/or Myria Petrou from January 1, 2015 to present.”
My FOIA request was denied (attached) with the University claiming exemptions “under Section 13 (1) (g) of the Michigan Freedom of Information Act, which protects from disclosure ‘information on or records subject to the attorney-client privilege,’ and/or Section 13 (1) (m) of the Act, which allows the University to refrain from disclosing certain communications and notes of an advisory nature. We believe that in this particular instance, public interest in encouraging frank communication between University employees outweighs the public interest in disclosure. We believe that in this particular instance, public interest in encouraging frank communication between University employees outweighs the public interest in disclosure.”
Given the the University’s last sentence in the above paragraph, the University is staking its position to deny release of the Russia-Gate documents on the claimed exemption of Section (1)(m) (communications of an advisory matter) and clouding the issue with the attorney-client privilege which as you know would not apply if a third party was involved and/or related to business matter.
Under the FOIA, the University of Michigan has the burden of showing that the frank communication exemption applies, including why the public's interest in non-disclosure clearly outweighs the public's right to receive records in the particular instance. Bukowski v City of Detroit, 478 Mich 268 (2007); Hear!d Co, Inc v Eastern Michigan University Board of Regents,2 65 Mich App 185 (2005) (citations omitted). The University of Michigan has not and cannot show that the public interest in promoting frank communications clearly outweighs the public's interest in disclosure in this instance. The communications sought, and the advisory communications contained therein, relate directly to University's response to an enormous public controversy and one of the biggest if not the biggest political scandal in recent modern history, namely Russia-Gate. As such, the public interest in learning how and why the University of Michigan is involved in Russia-Gate as it relates to two of its most successful faculty is overwhelming on its face.
In order to overcome this extreme public interest, the public's interest in non-disclosure must "clearly outweigh" the public's interest in disclosure. Once again, the University of Michigan cannot demonstrate that the public's interest in non-disclosure clearly outweighs the public's interest in disclosure, particularly in light of the fact Russia-Gate is repeatedly in the current news cycle as there are numerous critical unanswered questions including former University of Michigan faculty Paul Cronin’s statements which mirrored (and preceded by months) the Steele Dossier.
Given that the University’s claimed exemptions are not legal (as established above) to deny release of the two University of Michigan generated Russia-Gate documents, I am requesting the immediate release of my FOIA request to bring the University of Michigan back into compliance with the FOIA.
Sincerely,
Bradley Foerster
9337 Copenhaver Drive
Potomac, MD 20854
(612) 354-0408
Cc: UM Lead Counsel Tim Lynch, AG Nessel, Governor Whitmer, Myria Petrou Prosecutor Savit
