FREEDOM
OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF
THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL
DECISION
John Arizzi, Chairman, Board of Education,
Town of New Fairfield; and Board of Education,
Town of New Fairfield,
Complainants
against Docket
#FIC 1997-133
Dan Reese, Chairman, Board of Finance,
Town of New Fairfield; Bill Frederick,
Frederick H. Luks, Karen McKernan,
Francis Parisette, and Frank J. Mizak, as
Members of the Board of Finance,
Town of New Fairfield; and Board of Finance,
Town of New Fairfield,
Respondents December
3, 1997
The
above-captioned matter was scheduled to be heard as a contested case on
November 6, 1997, at which time the complainants and the respondents appeared
in order to present testimony and argument on the complaint.
At an informal
conference prior to the scheduled November 6, 1997 hearing, the complainants
and the respondents reached the terms of an agreement in resolution of this
contested case. Because the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) issues in this case
were inextricably intertwined with a variety of other fiscal issues concerning
education expenditures, the Commission attempted to assist the parties in the
negotiation of a comprehensive settlement that could serve as a cornerstone for
community reconciliation and for renewed cooperation among the elected public
officials of the Town of New Fairfield. For the purpose of creating a written
record of the agreement between the parties, the Commission sets forth herein
both the elements of the agreement which concern FOI, as well as those which
are beyond the jurisdiction of this Commission but which were necessary to
reaching an FOI settlement.
Specifically, the
parties agreed that:
a) the respondent Board of Finance acknowledges
that, consistent with its past practice, notice of meetings of the Board of
Finance Audit Committee were not posted and minutes were not kept as required
by the FOI Act, but that any non-compliance with the FOI Act was inadvertent;
the respondent Board of Finance agrees in the future to prepare minutes of the
Audit Committee meetings, that future Audit Committee meetings will comply with
FOI requirements including filing agendas and minutes, and that copies of all
correspondence sent or received by Board of Finance members as well as other
Audit Committee records will be kept at Town Hall in an accessible place;
b) while the respondent Board of Finance booked
$53,036 to the 1995-96 fiscal year based upon advice of auditors upon whom the
respondent Board of Finance relies and whom it respects, the complainant Board
of Education booked those expenditures to the 1996-97 fiscal year based upon
the past practice of the respondent Board of Education; any resulting deficit
inadvertently exceeded the budget; and the complainant Board of Education and
the respondent Board of Finance commit themselves to working together in the
future;
c) the respondent Board of Finance acknowledges
that there was no evidence revealed by the Auditors to suggest that any member
of the complainant Board of Education had misappropriated its funds or
submitted improper requests for reimbursement of expenses; and
d) the complainant Board of Education
acknowledges that it was an oversight for its business manager not to provide
the bus contracts to the Auditors, and the respondent Board of Finance
acknowledges that it was premature for the Auditors to make an FOI request to
the complainant Board of Education for the bus contracts.
Based upon this
agreement, the complainants informed the Commission that they wished to
withdraw their complaint.
The
Commission warmly commends both the complainants and the respondents for the
extraordinary effort they devoted to negotiating a non-litigated settlement of
the differences they previously had concerning FOI matters and many other
issues.
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 special meeting of
December 3, 1997.
_________________________
Doris V. Luetjen
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 OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:
John Arizzi, Chairman, Board of Education,
Town of New Fairfield; and Board of Education,
Town of New Fairfield,
c/o Marc L. Zaken
Cummings and Lockwood
P.O. Box 120
Stamford, CT 06904
Dan Reese
2 Hudson Drive
New Fairfield, CT 06812
Bill Frederick
14 Pinewood Drive
New Fairfield, CT 06812
Frederick H. Luks
c/o Arthur Azzarito
14 Old Farm Road
New Fairfield, Ct 06812
Karen McKernan
27 Inglenook Drive
New Fairfield, CT 06812
Francis Parisette
99 Pine Hill Road
New Fairfield, CT 06812
Frank J. Mizak
38 Possum Drive
New Fairfield, CT 06812
Board of Finance
Town of New Fairfield
Town Hall
4 Brush Hill Road
New Fairfield, CT 06812
__________________________
Doris V. Luetjen
Acting Clerk of the Commission
FIC1997-133/FD/tcg/12031997