FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by Report of Hearing Officer
Richard J. Branche,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 91-334
Board of Directors, Center Groton Fire District and Center Groton Fire District,
Respondents April 8, 1992
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on March 9, 1992, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint. This case was consolidated for hearing with Docket #FIC 91-315 and Docket #FIC 91-393.
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 letter of complaint filed October 21, 1991 and postmarked October 17, 1991, the complainant appealed to the Commission, alleging that:
a. no agenda was available for the respondent Board's September 18, 1991 meeting;
b. the minutes of the August meeting, which were approved at the September 18, 1991 meeting, did not mention that the complainant was not permitted to remain at the August meeting;
c. respondent board members constantly smoked at the September 18 meeting;
d. the attorney for the respondent issued an opinion that meetings of the executive board of the respondent did not have to adhere to the by-laws pertaining to meetings of the respondent Fire District;
e. the September 18 meeting was improperly adjourned to September 25, 1991;
f. the September 25, 1991 continuation of the September 18 meeting was not noticed; and
Docket #FIC 91-334 Page 2
g. no voting record or minutes of the September 18 and September 25 meetings are available through the Groton Town Clerk's office.
3. It is found that the respondent Board held a meeting on September 18, 1991 that was continued to September 25, 1991.
4. The Commission takes administrative notice of its records and final decisions in Docket #FIC 91-261, Docket #FIC 91-266 and Docket #FIC 91-287.
5. It is found that the respondents do not have a regular office or place of business.
6. It is also found that the respondents are located within the Town of Groton.
7. With respect to the allegations described in paragraphs 2.a and 2.g, above, the respondents stipulated at the hearing that the agenda, minutes and record of vote for the meeting held on September 18 and September 25, 1991 were not filed with the Groton Town Clerk.
8. It is concluded that the respondents violated 1-19(a) and 1-21(a), G.S., by failing to maintain and make available the agenda, minutes and record of vote for the meeting held on September 18 and 25, 1991 with the Groton Town Clerk.
9. With respect to the allegations described in paragraphs 2.e and 2.f, above, it is found that the respondents did not cause a written notice of the adjournment of the September 18 meeting to September 25 to be given in the same manner as provided in 1-21, G.S., or post a copy of the notice of adjournment on or near the door of the place where the meeting was held.
10. It is concluded that the respondents violated 1-21d, G.S., by failing to fulfill the statutory obligations described in paragraph 9, above.
11. With respect to the remainder of the complainant's allegations, as described in paragraphs 2.b, 2.c and 2.d, above, it is concluded that the complainant has failed to allege a violation of the Freedom of Information Act.
12. The Commission notes that the respondents indicated at the hearing on Docket #FIC 91-261, Docket #FIC 91-266 and Docket #FIC 91-287 that they failed to comply with the requirements of 1-19(a) and 1-21(a), G.S., through inadvertence, and would comply with such requirements in the future.
Docket #FIC 91-334 Page 3
13. The Commission also notes that the complaint in this matter was filed before the matters in Docket #FIC 91-261, Docket #FIC 91-266 and Docket #FIC 91-287 were heard as contested cases, and that the Commission had not issued final decisions in those matters before the complaint in this matter was heard.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:
1. With respect to the allegations described in paragraphs 2.a, 2.e, 2.f and 2.g of the findings, above, henceforth the respondents shall strictly comply with the provisions of 1-19(a), 1-21(a), and 1-21d, G.S. Specifically, the respondents shall forthwith and henceforth cause copies or the originals of all their public records within the meaning of 1-18a(d) and 1-19(a), G.S., including but not limited to records pertaining to previous and future meetings, to be filed with the Groton Town Clerk, unless and until the respondents establish a regular and accessible office or place of business.
2. With respect to the allegations described in paragraphs 2.b, 2.c and 2.d of the findings, above, the complaint is dismissed.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of April 8, 1992.
Debra L. Rembowski
Acting Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC 91-334 Page 4
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:
Richard J. Branche
390 Hazelnut Hill Road
Groton, CT 06340
Board of Directors, Center Groton Fire District
Center Groton Fire District
c/o Attorney Ellen Brown Nicholas
Gianacoplos, Johnson, Nicholas and Grater, P.C.
100 Fort Hill Road
Groton, CT 06340
Debra L. Rembowski
Acting Clerk of the Commission