FREEDOM OF
INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF
CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of
a Complaint by FINAL DECISION
George
Jordanides,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 86-64
Board of Police
Commissioners and Board of Selectman of the Town of Seymour,
Respondents April 23, 1986
The above captioned matter was heard
as a contested case on March 25, 1986, at which time the complainant and the
respondents appeared and presented testimony and argument on the complaint.
After consideration of the entire
record the following facts are found:
1.
The respondents are public agencies within the meaning of 1-18a(a),
G.S.
2.
On February 27, 1986 the respondent board of police commissioners held a
properly noticed special meeting.
3.
By letter of complaint filed with the Commission on March 5, 1986 the
complainant alleged that the respondent board of selectmen attended and
participated in the February 27, 1986 special meeting without proper notice and
agenda in violation of the Freedom of Information Act.
4.
It is found that the respondent board of selectmen is composed of seven
members and that four members constitutes a quorum.
5.
It is found that Selectman Koskelowski, Selectman King, Selectman Marks,
Selectman Rapuano and Selectman Davies were present at the special meeting in
question.
7.
It is further found that although a quorum of the respondent board of
selectmen attended the special meeting, none of them planned or intended to
meet together in their official capacities as members of the respondent board
of selectmen.
Docket #FIC
86-64
Page 2
7.
It is therefore concluded that the named selectmen's attendance at the
special meeting did not constitute a meeting of the respondent board of
selectmen within the meaning of 1-18a(b), G.S.
The following order by the
Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the
above captioned complaint:
1.
The complaint is hereby dismissed.
2.
The Commission notes that although a violation was not found in the
present case, the respondent board of selectmen should recognize that in other
circumstances, a gathering of a quorum to discuss matters within the board's
control, jurisdiction or advisory power may constitute a meeting under 1-18a(b),
G.S. Additionally, the respondent board
should be sensitive to the fact that observant citizens, such as the
complainant, can draw reasonable inferences that such violations did occur
under circumstances, as here, where the selectmen also participated in the
meeting. To prevent future problems,
the respondent board of selectmen may want to post notice when a quorum of the
board plans to attend and participate in a meeting of another agency.
Approved by order of the Freedom of
Information Commission at its special meeting of April 23, 1986.
ÿ
Karen J.
Haggett
Clerk of the Commission