FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        Final Decision

 

Karla Schuster and New Haven Register,

 

                        Complainants

 

            against              Docket #FIC 93-47

 

Connecticut Association of Adult and Continuing Education,

 

                        Respondent                  September 22, 1993

 

 

complainants 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.  It is found that by letter dated February 8, 1993, the complainants demanded access to certain documents maintained by the respondent including all audits of the respondents finances performed between 1986 and the present time, membership records, conference records, and banking records.

 

            2.  It is also found that by letter dated February 11, 1993, the respondent denied the complainants' request on the basis that it is neither a public agency pursuant to the provisions of the Freedom of Information ("FOI") Act nor the functional equivalent of a public agency.

 

            3.  By letter filed with this Commission on February 25, 1993, the complainants appealed the respondent's denial.

 

            4.  It is found that the respondent is an organization incorporated as a non-stock corporation since 1989, which is open to corporations, non-profit groups, community groups, individuals, and public or private educational groups.  It provides a forum for the discussion of professional development issues and strives to promote adult literacy.

 

            5.  It is also found that the membership of the respondent currently consists primarily of public school districts.

 

            6.  It is found that the respondent issues newsletters containing information concerning a variety of topics including books, programs and legislation; organizes conferences; and provides to its members the opportunity to earn continuing education units.

 

Docket #FIC 93-47                             Page 2

 

            7.  It is found that the respondent collects membership fees, conference fees, vendor fees for exhibition booths at its annual conference, sponsor fees, and in-kind contributions from public relations and printing firms.

 

            8.  The complainants' claim that because the majority of the respondent's members pay membership and conference fees to the respondent from their own public monies, the respondent is publicly funded within the meaning of the functional equivalence test set forth in Connecticut Humane Society v. FOI Commission, 218 Conn. 757 (1991).

 

            9.  The respondent claims that it receives no direct public funding, and its membership is open to private organizations as well as public ones. 

 

            10.  It is concluded that although public dollars are allocated from the budgets of the respondent's members to pay fees to the respondent, the respondent does not receive a direct allotment of public funds at the present time.

 

            11.  The complainants claim that the respondent serves a governmental function due to the fact that it provides its members the opportunity to earn continuing education units, which units are required for teaching in the state of Connecticut.

 

            12.  It is found that the function described in paragraph 11, above, is different from that of the public education of school children which is traditionally a function of government.

 

            13.  It is concluded that under the facts of this case, the respondent does not presently carry out a governmental function.

 

            14.  The complainants also claim that the line between the public and private aspects of the respondent's status is blurred since the officers of the respondent can be reached at public agencies and a New Haven public agency at one time housed a fax machine purchased by the respondent.  Furthermore, the director of the New Haven adult education center, a public agency, has been a director of the respondent.

            15.  It is concluded that the complainants' position stated in paragraph 14, above, fails to state facts to establish that the respondent is regulated by or was created by government.

 

            16.  It is concluded, on balance, that the respondent does not under current circumstances operate as the functional equivalent of a public agency within the teachings Humane Society, supra.

 

Docket #FIC 93-47                             Page 3

 

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

 

            1.  The complaint is hereby dismissed.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of September 22, 1993.

 

                                                                 

                                    Debra L. Rembowski

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 93-47                             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:

Karla Schuster and New Haven Register

c/o Mr. Fred Laberge

New Haven Register

40 Sargent Drive

New Haven, CT 06511-5918

 

Connecticut Association of Adult and Continuing Education

c/o Richard R. Brown, Esq.

Brown, Paindiris & Zarella

100 Pearl Street

Hartford, CT 06103-4506

 

                                                                 

                                    Debra L. Rembowski

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission