FIC1996-019

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by Final Decision

Susan G. Kniep,

Complainant(s)

against Docket #FIC 1996-019

Town Council, Town of East Hartford,

Respondent(s) October 16, 1996

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on May 29, 1996, at which time the complainant(s) and respondent(s) appeared 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 and filed with the Commission on January 11, 1996, the complainant alleged that the respondent violated §1-21, G.S., by formulating a consent calendar at its December 12, 1995 meeting (“December meeting”) and January 9, 1996 meeting (“January meeting”), prior to the publicly held council meeting.

3. It is found that the Democratic and Republican party caucuses met prior to the December and January meetings to discuss the items on the agenda for each meeting.

4. It is found that the two individuals comprising the leadership of the two caucuses then met to identify those agenda items that each party wanted to move forward, and those items each party agreed should be placed on the consent calendar because no discussion or opposition was expected.

5. It is found that there was no substantive discussion about any of the agenda items during the formulation of the consent calendar.

            6.         Section 1-18a(b), G.S., defines a meeting as:

            any hearing or other proceeding of a public agency, any convening or assembly
            of a quorum of a multimember public agency, and any communication by or to
            a quorum of a multimember public agency, … to discuss or act upon a matter over
            which the public agency has supervision, control, jurisdiction or advisory power.
            ‘Meeting’ shall not include: … a caucus of members of a single political party
            notwithstanding the fact that such members also constitute a quorum of a public
            agency …. And communication limited to notice of meetings of any public
            agency or the agendas thereof. “Caucus” means a convening or assembly of the
            enrolled members of a single political party who are members of a public agency ….

7. It is found that the meetings of the separate party caucuses were not meetings within the meaning of §1-18a(b), G.S.

8. It is found that the meetings of the two party leaders apart from the caucuses were not caucuses within the meaning of §1-18a(b), G.S.

9. It is found that a quorum of the respondent council was not present at the meetings of the party leaders.

10. It is also found that neither the majority nor minority leader have the authority to bind the respondent council because a unanimous vote is necessary to adopt and approve the consent calendar.

11. Under the facts and circumstances of this case, it is also found that the meetings of the party leadership solely to place items on the consent calendar did not constitute a proceeding of the respondent council.

12. Under the facts and circumstances of this case, it is found further that the meetings of the party leadership did not constitute a communication by or to a quorum of the respondent council.

13. Consequently, it is concluded under the facts and circumstances of this case, that the respondent council did not violate the open meeting provision of §1-21(a), G.S., when the council’s party leaders met prior to the respondent’s December and January meetings.

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 October 16, 1996.

__________________________

Elizabeth A. Leifert

Acting Clerk of the Commission

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 Acting Clerk of the Commission

OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.

THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:

Susan G. Kniep

50 Olde Roberts Street

East Hartford, CT 06108

Town Council

Town Of East Hartford

740 Main Street

East Hartford, CT 06108

__________________________

Elizabeth A. Leifert

Acting Clerk of the Commission