FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        FINAL DECISION

 

Lourdes O'Neil Haynes and Voices,

 

                        Complainants,

 

            against              Docket #FIC 89-401

 

Newtown Board of Selectmen,

 

                        Respondent                  January 10, 1990

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on November 20, 1989, at which time the complainants and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  This case was consolidated with the continuation of Docket #FIC 89-180 for hearing.

 

            After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:

 

            1.  The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

            2.  By letter dated October 27, 1989, and filed with the Commission on October 30, 1989, the complainants appealed to the Commission, alleging the respondent held an illegal meeting on May 31, 1989.

 

            3.  It is found that the complainants did not learn of the facts on which they based their allegations until October 25, 1989.

 

            4.  It is found that the complainants filed their complaint within thirty days of learning about these facts.

 

            5.  It is concluded, therefore, that the Commission has jurisdiction over the complaint.

 

            6.  It is found that the Newtown first selectman invited the second selectman, the co-chairpersons of the Newtown legislative council's jail sub-committee, and a town attorney to join him for dinner at approximately 6:00 p.m. on May 31, 1989, and that they did so.

 

            7.  It is found the purpose for the dinner was to update these persons on issues related to the jail before the meetings

 

Docket #FIC 89-401                           Page Two

 

of the jail sub-committee and full legislative council that evening.

 

            8.  It is found that issues pertaining to the jail were discussed at the dinner.

 

            9.  It is found that the municipal response to the jail and related issues are matters over which the respondent has supervision and jurisdiction.

 

            10.  It is found that the respondent has three members.

 

            11.  It is found that the attendance of two of the respondent's members at the dinner constitutes an assembly of a quorum of the respondent.

 

            12.  It is concluded, therefore, that the dinner was a meeting of the respondent, as defined by 1-18a(b), G.S., and subject to the open meeting requirements of the Freedom of Information Act.

 

            13.  It is found that no notice, agenda or minutes were ever created for this meeting.

 

            14.  Thus it is concluded that the respondent violated 1-21(a), G.S., by holding a meeting without providing a notice, agenda or minutes, and thereby denying public access.

 

            The following order of the Commission is hereby recommended based on the complete record in the above-captioned matter:

 

            1.  The respondent henceforth shall act in strict compliance with the open meeting requirements of 1-21(a), G.S.

 

            2.  The respondent's members shall attend an educational workshop on Freedom of Information Act requirements, to be given by a Commission staff attorney, within 60 days of the mailing of the notice of final decision in this case.

 

            3.  The respondent shall invite in writing all Newtown officials and administrative employees to attend the educational workshop.

 

            4.  The respondent shall cause the final decision in this matter to be posted by the town clerk in the town hall for 60 days after the mailing of the notice of final decision.

 

            5.  The respondent's member who is the first selectman

 

Docket #FIC 89-401                           Page Three

 

shall read aloud the final decision in this matter at the first meeting of the respondent after the Commission adopts a final decision.

 

Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of January 10, 1990.

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 89-401                           Page Four

 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.

 

THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:

LOURDES O'NEIL HAYNES AND VOICES

Box 383

Southbury, CT 06488

 

NEWTOWN LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

c/o David L. Grogins

158 Deer Hill Avenue

Danbury, CT

 

NEWTOWN BOARD OF SELECTMAN

c/o Stephen D. Wipperman, Esquire

19 Church Hill Road

Newtown, CT 06470

 

NEWTOWN LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL - JAIL SUBCOMMITTEE

c/o Elaine R. McClure

4 North Branch Road

RD #1

Newtown, CT 06470

 

            and

 

Joseph M. Mahoney

20 Diamond Drive

Newtown, CT 06470

 

RODERICK J. MACKENZIE, JR.

Edmond Town Hall

45 Main Street

Newtown, CT 06470

 

K. MICHAEL SNYDER

58 Osborne Hill Road

Sandy Hook, CT 06482

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission