FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        Final Decision

 

Susan G. Kniep,

 

                        Complainant

 

            against              Docket #FIC 93-200

 

East Hartford Board of Education,

 

                        Respondent                  December 8, 1993

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on October 15, 1993, 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.  The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

            2.  By letter dated July 20, 1993 and filed July 21, 1993, the complainant appealed to the Commission and alleged that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information Act in connection with its July 12, 1993 meeting.

 

            3.  Specifically, the complainant maintains that the respondent improperly convened its July 12, 1993 meeting, characterizing it as a regular meeting when it should have noticed it as a special meeting; and improperly added to and voted on an item that was not on its meeting agenda.

 

            4.  It is found that the respondent held a meeting on July 12, 1993 which it designated as a regular meeting.

 

            5.  It is found that pursuant to its list of regular meetings filed with the East Hartford town clerk, the respondent was scheduled to convene its regular July meeting on July 5, 1993.

 

            6.  It is found however that the respondent changed the date of its regularly scheduled July meeting, because the date on which it was originally scheduled, Monday, July 5, 1993 happened to fall on a legal holiday.  Due to the holiday 

 

Docket #FIC 93-200                           Page 2

 

conflict, the respondent determined that it would hold its regular meeting on the following Monday, July 12, 1993.

 

            7.  It is also found that the respondent noted under the "Calendar of Future Events" portion of its June 9, 1993 regular meeting agenda that it would hold its regular July meeting on July 12, 1993.

 

            8.  It is also found however, that the respondent did not file a notice of its July 12, 1993 meeting with the East Hartford town clerk.

 

            9.  Section 1-21f, G.S., provides in relevant part:

 

                        "If at any time any regular meeting falls on

                        a holiday, such regular meeting shall be held

                        on the next business day."

 

            10.  It is found that in the event that its regularly scheduled meeting happens to fall on a holiday, 1-21f, G.S., does not authorize an agency to convene such regularly scheduled meeting on the same day of the following week, although under  1-21d, G.S., it could have adjourned its meeting from the next business day after a holiday to another time and date.

 

            11.  It is therefore concluded that the respondent's July 12, 1993 meeting constituted a special meeting and the respondent's failure to file a notice of it as such violated the terms of 1-21(a), G.S.

 

            12.  Section 1-21(a), G.S., further provides in relevant part:

 

                        "The notice [of special meeting] shall specify

                        ...the business to be transacted.  No other

                        business shall be considered at such meetings

                        by such public agency...."

 

            13.  It is found that during its July 12, 1993 special meeting, the respondent amended its agenda to add the approval of a bus contract and ultimately approved the bus contract.

 

            14.  It is further concluded that the respondent violated the provisions of 1-21(a), G.S., by adding to and voting on an item that was not included in the notice of its July 12, 1993 special meeting.

 

Docket #FIC 93-200                           Page 3

 

            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 strictly comply with the provisions of 1-21(a), G.S.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of December 8, 1993.

 

                                                                 

                                    Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 93-200                           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:

Susan G. Kniep

C/o Chuck Greenwald, Esq.

Corporation Counsel's Office

740 Main Street

East Hartford, CT 06108

 

East Hartford Board of Education

c/o Greg Ladesky, Esq.

Shipman & Goodwin

One American Row

Hartford, CT 06103-2819

 

                                                                 

                                    Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission