FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION
Louis G. Cavalier and New Haven Police Union Local No. 530,
Complainants
against Docket #FIC 90-490
New Haven Board of Police Commissioners,
Respondent June 12, 1991
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on April 4, 1991, at which time the complainants appeared, presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint, but the respondent failed to appear.
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 of complaint dated December 14, 1990 and filed December 17, 1990, the complainant appealed to the Commission alleging that at its December 11, 1990 regular meeting, the respondent convened in executive session without notifying individual police officers that their performance was going to be one of the subjects of the executive session and without providing them the opportunity for an open session.
3. It is found that the agenda for the respondent's December 11, 1990 regular meeting listed executive session and detailed several items which were to be considered during the executive session, including one item entitled "permanent appointments."
4. It is further found that the respondent did not notify the subjects of the executive session who were being considered for permanent appointment as Sergeant nor provide them with the opportunity for an open session.
Docket #FIC 90-490 Page 2
5. It is concluded therefore that the respondent violated 1-18a(e)(1), G.S., by failing to inform the individuals who were being considered for permanent appointment as Sergeant that they were going to be discussed in the executive session and by not providing them the opportunity to request a public session.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:
1. Henceforth the respondent shall act in strict compliance with the requirements set forth in 1-18a(e)(1) and 1-21(a), G.S.
2. Although the complainants did not raise the issue in their appeal to the Commission, the Commission notes that the respondent voted in executive session to approve the minutes of an earlier executive session of October 9, 1990, and reminds the respondent that under the Freedom of Information Act, such a vote is not permitted to be conducted in an executive session, but rather must be conducted in an open session.
3. Likewise, although the complainants did not raise the issue in their appeal, the Commission notes that the minutes for the regular meeting do not indicate that the public was informed of the subject for the executive session. The Commission reminds the respondent that under the Freedom of Information Act, it is necessary to publicly state the reason for the executive session and to list the reason in the minutes of the meeting during which the executive session was convened.
Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of June 12, 1991.
Karen J. Haggett
Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC 90-490 Page 3
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:
LOUIS G. CAVALIER AND NEW HAVEN POLICE UNION LOCAL NO. 530
1 Union Avenue
New Haven, CT 06519
NEW HAVEN BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS
1 Union Avenue
New Haven, CT 06519
Karen J. Haggett
Clerk of the Commission