FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

           

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on September 20, 2007, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.   The matter was consolidated for hearing with Docket #FIC 2007-144, Larry Freundlich v. Michael Pace, First Selectman, Town of Old Saybrook; and Board of Selectmen, Town of Old Saybrook, and Docket #FIC 2007-281, Larry Freundlich v. Michael Pace, First Selectman, Town of Old Saybrook; and Board of Selectmen, Town of Old Saybrook. 

 

            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 filed March 26, 2007, the complainant appealed to the Commission, alleging that the respondents violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act at its January 24, 2007 meeting by convening in executive session to discuss the complainant’s employment as director of the town’s Youth and Family Services (“YFS”), without notifying the complainant.  The complainant also requested the imposition of civil penalties against the respondent first selectman.

 

3.  It is found that the respondent board held a special meeting on January 24, 2007.

 

4.  It is found that the agenda for the meeting indicated only that the respondents intended to convene in executive session to discuss personnel matters.

            5.  It is found that minutes of the January 24, 2007 meeting indicate that the board entered into executive session to discuss personnel matters, and the individuals who attended.  The individuals who attended included individuals who had filed an employment discrimination complaint against the complainant, and their union representative.  The executive session lasted approximately one hour.  The minutes reflect that, after returning to open session, the board agreed “that the grievance has merit.”

 

6.  It is found that the January 24, 2007 executive session was convened to discuss an employment discrimination complaint lodged against the complainant.  With reference to that employment discrimination complaint, see Docket #FIC 2007-144, Freundlich v. Michael Pace et al.

 

7.  It is found that the respondents did not notify the complainant that they intended to discuss his employment in executive session.

 

8.  It is found that the January 24, 2007 meeting at which the complainant alleges the respondents violated the FOI Act occurred more than 30 days before the filing of this complaint.

 

9.  Section 1-206(b)(1), G.S., provides in relevant part:

 

Any person denied the right to inspect or copy records under section 1-210 or wrongfully denied the right to attend any meeting of a public agency or denied any other right conferred by the Freedom of Information Act may appeal therefrom to the Freedom of Information Commission, by filing a notice of appeal with said commission.  A notice of appeal shall be filed within thirty days after such denial, except in the case of an unnoticed or secret meeting, in which case the appeal shall be filed within thirty days after the person filing the appeal receives notice in fact that such meeting was held. 

 

10.  The complainant essentially contends that the January 24, 2007 meeting was unnoticed or secret within the meaning of §1-206(b)(1), G.S., because he did not learn of the meeting until February 23, 2007 when he reviewed the minutes of the meeting. 

 

11.  In FIC 2007-144, Larry Freundlich v. Michael Pace, First Selectman, Town of Old Saybrook; and Board of Selectmen, Town of Old Saybrook, the Commission concluded that the agendas and minutes of October 11 and 23, 2006 meetings of the respondent board, which referred only to executive sessions to discuss personnel matters, were so lacking in information that the executive sessions convened at those meetings were “secret or unnoticed” within the meaning of §1-206(b)(1), G.S.

 

12.  Although the minutes of the January 24, 2007 board meeting are also not very illuminating as to the business transacted at the respondents’ meeting, it is found that the complainant, by virtue of a conversation with selectman Bill Peace, had actual notice of the morning January 24, 2007 executive session by the afternoon of that same day.

 

13.  It is therefore concluded that the complainant had notice in fact that the respondents held a meeting to discuss the grievance against the complainant on January 24, 2007.

 

14.  It is concluded that the Commission lacks subject matter jurisdiction to address the complaint, pursuant to §1-206(b)(1), G.S.

 

 

 

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

 

            1.  The complaint is dismissed.

 

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of February 27, 2008.

 

________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

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:

 

Larry Freundlich

Director

Youth and Family Services

322 Main Street

Old Saybrook, CT 06475

           

Michael Pace, First Selectman,

Town of Old Saybrook; and

Board of Selectmen,

Town of Old Saybrook

c/o Lisa S. Lazarek, Esq.

Kainen, Escalera & McHale, P.C.

21 Oak Street

Hartford, CT 06106

 

 

 

___________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

FIC/2007-180FD/paj/3/3/2008