FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by

FINAL DECISION

Lucille C. Malavenda,

 

Complainant

 

 

against

 Docket #FIC 2000-209

Michael D. Quinn, Chairman, Board
of Commissioners, Housing Authority,
City of Meriden; Carl H. Lohmann,
Vice Chairman, Board of Commissioners,
Housing Authority, City of Meriden;
Jennie T. Roccapriore, Treasurer, Board
of Commissioners, Housing Authority,
City of Meriden; and Board of Commissioners,
Housing Authority, City of Meriden,

 

 

Respondents

October 11, 2000

 

 

 

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on June 6, 2000, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  At the hearing in this matter, the complainant withdrew the complaint against Carl H. Lohmann, Vice Chairman, Board of Commissioners, Housing Authority, City of Meriden.   

 

           

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 §1-200(1), G.S.

 

            2.  By letter of complaint dated April 29, 2000, and filed with the Commission on May 2, 2000, the complainant alleged that the respondents violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act with respect to an April 24, 2000 meeting of the respondent board by discussing in executive session matters other than personnel issues, which was the reason given for such session.  The complainant also alleged violations at meetings of the respondent board in November, 1999 and on February 16, 2000.  However, such allegations will not be considered herein, since the FOI Act requires the filing of a complaint within 30 days of an alleged violation, pursuant to §1-206(b)(1), G.S.  Accordingly, the complaint is limited to the allegation concerning the April 24, 2000 meeting of the respondent board.  

 

            3.  It is found that the respondent board held a regular meeting on April 24, 2000, and that, during such meeting, it convened in executive session and discussed the renewal of the contract of its executive director.   

 

4.  Section 1-225(a), G.S., provides, in relevant part:

 

[t]he meetings of all public agencies, except executive sessions as defined in subdivision (6) of section 1-200, shall be open to the public….

 

5.  Section 1-200(6), G.S., defines “executive session” to include:

 

…a meeting of a public agency at which the public is excluded for one or more of the following purposes:  (A)  Discussion concerning the appointment, employment, performance, evaluation, health or dismissal of a public officer or employee, provided that such individual may require that discussion be held at an open meeting.

 

6.  It is found that the discussion concerning the renewal of the executive director’s contract constituted a discussion concerning the “employment, performance and evaluation” of a public employee within the meaning of §1-200(1), G.S.

 

7.  It is therefore concluded that, despite the speculation of the complainant, the respondents did not violate the FOI Act, as alleged in the complaint. 

 

            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.      

 

2.  Although not alleged in the complaint, the respondents testified that the minutes of the April 24, 2000 meeting do not accurately reflect the respondents’ vote on the executive director’s contract.  The Commission asks that the respondents correct the minutes of such meeting accordingly.    

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of October 11, 2000.

 

 

_________________________

Dolores E. Tarnowski 

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:

 

 

Lucille C. Malavenda

144 Allen Avenue

Meriden, CT  06451

 

 

 Michael D. Quinn, Chairman, Board

 of Commissioners, Housing Authority,

 City of Meriden; Carl H. Lohmann,

 Vice Chairman, Board of Commissioners,

 Housing Authority, City of Meriden;

 Jennie T. Roccapriore, Treasurer, Board

 of Commissioners, Housing Authority,

 City of Meriden; and Board of Commissioners,

 Housing Authority, City of Meriden

c/o Floyd J. Dugas, Esq.

Berchem, Moses & Devlin, P.C.

75 Broad Street

Milford, CT  06460

 

 

__________________________

Dolores E. Tarnowski

Clerk of the Commission

 

 

 

FIC2000-209FD/mes10132000