FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        Final Decision

 

Robert Redente and East Haven Firefighters, Local No. 1205,

 

                                Complainants

 

                against                   Docket #FIC 91-268

 

Joseph Piccirillo, Edward Donroe, Ray Donnelly and Vincent Palmer,  East Haven Board of Fire Commissioners, George Hennessey, East Haven Fire Chief, and William Webster, East Haven Assistant Fire Chief,

 

                                Respondents                        February 26, 1992

 

                The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on January 9, 1992, at which time the complainants and the respondents 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.  The respondents are public agencies within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

                2.             By complaint filed September 3, 1991, the complainant alleged that on August 26, 1991, the respondents held an illegal closed meeting to discuss individual employee grievances.

 

                3.             The complainants claimed among other things that the respondents held an illegal executive session because:

 

                a.             the employees whose grievances were discussed had no notice either that the grievances would be considered at the August 26, 1991 meeting, or that the grievances would be considered in executive session; and

 

                b.             the executive session was attended by persons who should not have been present.

 

Docket #FIC 91-268                                             Page Two

 

                4.             The complainants requested that the Commission impose civil penalties upon the named respondents.          

 

                5.             It is found that on August 26, 1991, the respondents held an executive session at which they denied grievances numbered 91-3, 91-4, 91-5, 91-6 and 91-7.

 

                6.             It is found that the grievances that were denied concerned the performance and employment of several firefighters.

 

                7.             It is found that the agenda for the August 26, 1991 meeting did not give notice that the five employee grievances described above would be considered at the August 26, 1991 meeting.

 

                8.             It is found that the firefighters whose grievances were considered at the executive session were not informed that they had a right pursuant to 1-18a(e)(1), G.S. to require  public discussion of their performance and employment.

 

                9.             It is concluded that the executive session held by the respondents on August 26, 1991 to consider the five grievances described at paragraph 5 above was illegal for two reasons:  (1) it was held without proper notice to the public as required by 1-21, G.S., and (2) it was held without proper notice to the firefighters regarding the right to require that the executive session be held in public as required by 1-18a(e)(1), G.S.

 

                10.           It is found that the respondent chief and the respondent assistant chief attended the executive session.

 

                11.           It is found that the attendance of the respondent chief and the respondent assistant chief at executive sessions of the respondent board is customary.

 

                12.           It is found that the respondent failed to prove that the attendance of the respondent chief and the respondent assistant chief during the entirety of the executive session was necessary to present testimony or opinion as limited by 1-21g, G.S.

 

                13.           It is concluded that the respondent board violated 1-21g when it permitted the respondent chief and the respondent assistant chief to attend the entirety of the executive session.

 

                14.           It is concluded under the facts of this case that civil penalties are not appropriate.

 

Docket #FIC 91-268                                             Page Three

 

                The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint.

 

                1.             Pursuant to 1-21i, G.S., the actions taken at the August 26, 1991 executive session, which are described at paragraph 5 above, are hereby declared null and void.

 

                2.             The respondents shall comply henceforth with the limitations on attendance at executive sessions set forth at 1-21g, G.S.

 

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

 

Docket #FIC 91-268                                             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:

Robert Redente

East Haven Firefighters, Local No. 1205,

c/o Daniel Hunsberger

215 Washington Street

Hartford, CT 06106

 

Joseph Piccirillo, Edward Donroe, Ray Donnelly, Vincent Palmer, East Haven Board of Fire Commissioners, George Hennessey, East Haven Fire Chief, William Webster, East Haven Assistant Fire Chief

c/o Attorney Alfred J. Cronk

P.O. Box 147

East Haven, CT 06512

 

                                                                             

                                                Debra L. Rembowski

                                                Acting Clerk of the Commission