FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by Final Decision
Al Daigle,
Complainant
against Docket
#FIC 91-241
Marlborough First Selectman
and Marlborough Association for Senior Housing,
Respondents February 26, 1992
The above-captioned matter was scheduled for hearing
on September 30, 1991, at which time the complainant failed to appear and the
complaint was dismissed. Subsequently,
the matter was reopened and heard as a contested case on November 12, 1992, at
which time the complainant and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain
facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.
After consideration of the entire record, the
following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:
1. By letter
of complaint filed September 5, 1991, the complainant alleged that the
respondent had failed to provide him with certain requested financial records.
2. It is
found that the complainant made several requests for financial records within
the jurisdictional time period of thirty days prior to the date the complaint
was filed.
3. It
is found that the sole issue for decision in this case is whether the
respondent association (MASH, hereinafter) is a public agency within the
meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.
4. It
is found that on August 8, 1979, a certificate of incorporation as a non-profit
corporation was filed by MASH under
8-217, G.S. for the purpose of providing housing for elderly residents of
Marlborough.
5. It
is found that on November 11, 1979 MASH applied for federal assistance from the
Farmers' Home Administration Program.
6. It is
found that the application described at paragraph 5 was denied, and that the
denial included these reasons:
#FIC 91-241 Page
Two
(a) the proposed elderly housing was improperly
restricted to Marlborough residents; and
(b) MASH lacked the requisite experience to carry out
and operate the project.
7. It
is found that on July 21, 1981, MASH received its designation under
8-217 and 8-218, G.S., from the board of selectmen of Marlborough as the town's
community housing development corporation.
8. It
is found that on October 29, 1981, MASH amended its certificate of
incorporation to establish:
(a) the
purpose of the corporation is to provide housing for eligible elderly and
handicapped persons; and
(b) in
the event of the dissolution of the corporation, all assets, after the payment
of liabilities, would be returned to the agencies which had provided the
funding (the town of Marlborough and the state).
9. It
is found that on July 7, 1986 the town of Marlborough approved an appropriation
of $75,000 for MASH to buy land for its elderly housing project.
10. It
is found on July 31, 1987, in connection with advice concerning a question
regarding an alleged conflict of interest, the town counsel advised the
president of MASH that "although MASH is technically not a housing
authority for Marlborough, it seeks status tantamount to that, and its
activities vis-a-vis funding, grant applications and tax relief make it a
defacto housing authority in the town."
11. It
is found that on October 6, 1987 a resolution was adopted at a town meeting
with these features:
(a) it
appropriated $60,000 to be advanced, without interest, to MASH for use in the
development of its elderly housing project;
(b) it
authorized the execution of a cooperation agreement with MASH:;
(c) it
provided a tax abatement for MASH pursuant to 8-215, G.S.; and
#FIC 91-241 Page
Three
(d) it
provided for waiver of all building and inspection fees, and permit fees for
MASH.
12. It
is found that the town of Marlborough and MASH did enter into a cooperation
agreement that provided for:
(a) abatement
of property taxes, special assessments, building and inspection fees, and
(b) full
accounting from MASH regarding all advance funding expenditures, to include but
not be limited to a copy of the project financing plan and development budget
and quarterly reports on expenditures for the project.
13. It
is found that MASH expects to receive a $2.5 million grant from the Connecticut
Department of Housing for the construction of rental homes for the elderly
under the conditions specified in the General Statutes at in Chapter 129,
Connecticut Housing Authority Housing Projects, and Chapter 133, Housing,
Redevelopment and Urban Renewal and Human Resource Development Programs.
14. It
is concluded that MASH meets three of the four criteria advanced in Board of
Trustees of Woodstock Academy v. FOIC, 181 Conn. 544 (1980): (a) it receives most, if not all of its
funding from government; (b) it is
regulated by and closely involved with government; and (c) it performs a
governmental function.
15. It
is concluded, therefore, that the respondent MASH is a public agency within the
meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.
The following order by the Commission is hereby
recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned
complaint.
1. The
respondent MASH shall provide the complainant with copies of the financial
records requested by him during August, 1991, within two weeks of the date of
mailing the final decision in this matter.
Approved by Order of the
Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of February 26, 1992.
Debra L. Rembowski
Acting Clerk of the
Commission
#FIC 91-241 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:
Al Daigle
173 South Main Street
Marlborough, CT 06447
Marlborough First Selectman
c/o Attorney Eugene Scalise,
Jr.
Sherwood, Tillinghast &
Scalise
Glen Lochen East
P.O. Box 595
41A New London Turnpike
Glastonbury, CT 06033
Marlborough Association for
Senior Housing
c/o Attorney John H.
Goodrich, Jr.
Gordon, Muir and Foley
Hartford Square North
10 Columbus Boulevard
Hartford, CT 06106-1944
Debra L. Rembowski
Acting Clerk of the Commission