EDISON, NJ – Michael Vintzileos has filed a tort claim against Edison Township on March 12th, asserting that the township, and specifically Councilman Joe Coyle, have repeatedly violated his First Amendment rights and engaged in retaliatory actions. The claim accuses Coyle of premeditated suppression of free speech, citing his repeated interruptions of Vintzileos’ public comments.
Specifically when addressing the “Flag Ban” Ordinance supported by Councilman Coyle in November 2024. Democratic Committee members started a recall petition of Mayor Sam Joshi and Council President Nish Patel, which lead the Council to repeal the ‘Flag Ban” Ordinance in January.
According to the claim, Coyle’s actions, including a stated intention to disrupt Vintzileos’ speaking at every opportunity, constitute “chronic chaotic disturbances.” Vintzileos argues this term, previously used by the township to describe activist behavior, is a tactic to manipulate public perception and suppress dissent.
The tort claim further alleges collusion between a township Business Administrator (BA) and a township labor lawyer, who purportedly used a workplace harassment order to mask ongoing violations of First Amendment rights. Vintzileos suggests this is part of a pattern of suppressing free speech within the township.
This legal action follows Vintzileos’ submission of a tort claim highlighting the use of “public safety concerns” as a pretext for retaliating against activist Christo Makropolous and his supporters. Shortly after, Makropolous successfully defeated a VASPA order, which Vintzileos attributes to the exposure of this retaliatory tactic.
Vintzileos contends that Coyle’s actions have solidified grounds for litigation, potentially burdening Edison taxpayers with legal costs. He alleges that the township’s conduct goes beyond mere government waste, representing a criminal attempt to silence free speech.
The tort claim details Vintzileos’ participation in an April 2024 council meeting, where he challenged an ordinance targeting Makropolous. Using his “BongHoleo” persona and masks, he aimed to demonstrate his right to free expression and redress government actions. He alleges this prompted the council to expedite the ordinance, stifling activist participation. Vintzileos also accuses the township of illegally limiting comments on its Facebook page and cites the recent “Flag Ban” controversy, where items like flags, the US Constitution and his “BongHoleo” suit were deemed “props.”
He further alleges that Coyle, who voted in support of the “Flag Ban” Ordinance, defamed him by labeling him an “agitator” who uses “violent words,” attempting to justify retaliatory actions like VAPSA orders or criminal charges.
The tort claim outlines damages resulting from the township’s “course of conduct,” including violations of the First Amendment, the New Jersey State Constitution, and the Open Public Meetings Act. It cites “intentional and/or negligent infliction of emotional distress,” conspiracy, and civil rights violations. The amount of damages is currently unknown, pending further discovery.
