The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on September 1, 1998 
at which time the complainant and the respondents 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 respondents are public agencies within the meaning of §1-18a(1), G.S.

	2.  By letter of complaint dated January 19, 1998 and filed with the Commission 
on January 20, 1998, the complainant alleged that the respondents violated the Freedom 
of Information Act by failing to reduce to writing the January 8, 1998 vote of each 
member of the respondent commission and failing to make such vote available for public 
inspection within the time frame required by §1-21(a), G.S.  In her letter of complaint, the 
complainant requested that the commission declare the respondent commission’s decision 
of January 8, 1998 null and void.

	3.  It is found that the respondent commission held a regular meeting on January 
8, 1998, during which it voted to approve the town of Middlebury’s application for a 
water storage tank (hereinafter “water tank issue”).

	4.  Section 1-21(a), G.S., provides, in relevant part: “[T]he votes of each member 
of any … public agency upon any issue before such public agency shall be reduced to 
writing and made available for public inspection within forty-eight hours.”

	5.  At the hearing on this matter, the respondent commission conceded that it had 
failed to reduce to writing and make available for public inspection within forty-eight 
hours of the January 8, 1998 meeting the vote of its members with respect to the water 
tank issue.

	6.  It is found that on January 13, 1998, one day later than permitted under §1-
21(a), G. S., the respondent commission reduced to writing and made available for public 
inspection the vote of its members on the water tank issue.

	7.  It is therefore, concluded that the respondent commission technically violated 
the record of vote requirement of §1-21(a), G.S.

	8.  The Commission in its discretion declines to declare null and void the 
respondent commission’s vote on the water tank issue.

	The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of 
the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:

	1.  Henceforth, the respondents shall strictly comply with the record of vote 
requirement of §1-21(a), G.S.

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of 
October 28, 1998.

_________________________
Melanie R. Balfour
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:

Robin Guisti
c/o Atty. William L. Stevens
St. John, Scappini, Lombard & Stevens
13 First Avenue
Waterbury, CT 06710

Chairman, Planning and Zoning
Commission, Town of Middlebury;
and Planning and Zoning Commission,
Town of Middlebury
c/o Atty. W. Fielding Secor
Secor, Cassidy & McPartland, PC
41 Church Street
Waterbury, CT 06723

__________________________
Melanie R. Balfour
Acting Clerk of the Commission

FIC1998-017FD/mrb10291998