FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION
John Carlo,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 94-343
Louis Esposito, Vincent Giannotti, David Forsyth and
Allingtown Fire District Board of Fire Commissioners,
Respondents June 14, 1995
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on May 5, 1995, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint. The matter was consolidated for hearing with contested case docket #FIC 94-357.
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 with this Commission on September 30, 1994, the complainant alleged that the respondents violated the provisions of the Freedom of Information ("FOI") Act by entering executive session without a stated purpose and for reasons that did not meet the criteria for an executive session.
3. It is found that on September 6, 1994, the respondents indicated their intent to enter executive session to discuss "personnel matters" if any, and "financing radio system."
4. This Commission takes administrative notice of its final decision in contested case docket #FIC 90-48, wherein it is concluded that the phrase "personnel matters" is not sufficiently specific so as to notify the public as to whom or what issue is to be the topic of discussion in executive session.
5. It is found that on September 6, 1994, the respondents neglected to provide any further identifying information so as to inform the public of what or whom is to be discussed under the broad topic of "personnel matters."
Docket #FIC 94-343 Page 2
6. It is concluded that under the facts of this case, the respondents violated the provisions of 1-21(a), G.S.
7. It is also found that on September 6, 1994, the respondent entered executive session to discuss "financing radio system."
8. The respondents claim that pursuant to 1-18a(e), G.S., they were entitled to enter closed session because they sought the best financing rate from three banks they considered borrowing from.
9. It is found that the respondents' executive session discussion did not involve the selection of a site or the lease, sale or purchase of real estate pursuant to 1-18a(e)(4), G.S.
10. It is also found that the executive session discussion would not result in the disclosure of public records or the information contained herein described in subsection (b) of section 1-19, as provided in 1-18a(e)(5), G.S.
11. It is concluded that 1-18a(e), G.S., does not provide for an executive session of the type engaged in under the facts of this case.
12. It is concluded that the respondents' failure to permit public access to the discussion at issue is a violation of 1-21(a), G.S.
13. This Commission notes that the respondents are under prior Commission order to strictly comply with the requirements of 1-21(a), G.S., pursuant to the final decision in contested case docket #FIC 93-79 and that the Commission had made available to the respondents its resources to conduct an FOI Act workshop pursuant to contested case docket #FIC 94-184.
14. It is concluded that the respondents' denial of the public's rights to attend their September 6, 1994 closed-door discussion was without reasonable grounds pursuant to 1-21i(b)(2), G.S. under the facts of this case.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint.
1. Within thirty days of the mailing of the notice of the final decision in the instant case, each respondent shall remit to this Commission a civil penalty in the amount of $25.00 for a total in penalties due of $75.00.
Docket #FIC 94-343 Page 3
2. Henceforth the respondents 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 June 14, 1995.
Debra L. Rembowski
Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC Page
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:
JOHN CARLO
81 Richmond Avenue
West Haven, CT 06516
LOUIS ESPOSITO, VINCENT GIANNOTTI, DAVID FORSYTH AND ALLINGTOWN FIRE DISTRICT BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS
c/o Louis Smith Votto, Esq.
415 Main Street
P.O. Box 411
West Haven, CT 06516
Debra L. Rembowski
Clerk of the Commission