FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        Final Decision

 

Edwin Baumer,

 

                                Complainant

 

                against                   Docket #FIC 95-219

 

Newtown Zoning Commission,

 

                                Respondent                          April 24, 1996

 

                The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on February 6, 1996, 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 of complaint dated June 27, 1995 and filed with the Commission on June 29, 1995, the complainant appealed to the Commission alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information ("FOI") Act with respect to a hearing held on June 13, 1995 by:

 

                                a.             reconvening a closed hearing without proper notice;

 

                                b.             failing to record the votes taken; and

 

                                c.             improperly convening in executive session.

 

                3.  It is found that the respondent held a hearing on June 13, 1995 (hereinafter "the hearing"), and that the hearing constitutes a "meeting" within the meaning of 1-18a(b), G.S.

 

                4.  With respect to the allegation, as described in paragraph 2a., above, it is found that during the hearing the respondent recessed and later reconvened.

 

                5.  The complainant contends that the respondent banged a gavel, closed the hearing, continued such hearing to July 10, 1995 and subsequently improperly conducted business after such hearing was closed.

 

Docket #FIC 95-219                                                  Page 2

 

                6.  It is found that during the hearing the respondent suggested continuing the hearing to July 10, 1995, however, the respondent decided not to continue and instead the hearing proceeded following a recess.

 

                7.  It is found that the complainant did not leave the room in which the hearing was held and observed the entire hearing at all times.

 

                8.  It is concluded that the hearing was not continued within the meaning of 1-21e, G.S.

 

                9.  With respect to the allegation, as described in paragraph 2b., above, it is found that the respondent voted on the library issue and that such vote is recorded in the respondent's June 13, 1995 minutes, which indicate "the application was unanimously approved with a stipulation."

 

                10.  With respect to the allegation, as described in paragraph 2c., above, it is found that the respondent did not convene in executive session during the June 13, 1995 hearing.

 

                11.  It is therefore concluded that the respondent did not violate any provisions of the FOI Act.

 

                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 April 24, 1996.

 

                                                                             

                                                Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                                Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 95-219                                             Page 3

 

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:

Edwin Baumer

c/o Randall J. Carreira, Esq.

Box 373

Route 67

Bridgewater, CT 06752

 

Newtown Zoning Commission

c/o Donald A. Mitchell, Esq.

10 Harmony Street

Danbury, CT 06810

 

                                                                             

                                                Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                                Acting Clerk of the Commission