FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION
Frank Smith,  
  Complainant  
  against   Docket #FIC 2007-290

Brian W. Armet,

Executive Director,

The Mattabassett District,

 
  Respondent April 23, 2008
       

            

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on October 5, 2007, at which time the complainant and the respondent 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 respondent is a public agency within the meaning of §1-200(1), G.S.

 

2.  By letter of complaint filed May 15, 2007, the complainant appealed to the Commission, alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act by conducting a vote by telephone.

 

3.  It is found that the respondent conducted a telephone poll of the members of the Mattabassett District in July of 2004, to determine whether the District approved a loan of sick time to an injured employee of the District.

 

4.  It is found that the July, 2004 telephone poll was unnoticed.

 

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

 

Any person … 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. 

 

6.  It is found that the respondent maintains a handwritten record of the July, 2004 telephone vote, and that the handwritten record indicates that the complainant was telephoned on July 28, 2004, and consented to the loan of sick time.  The respondent also testified credibly that he called every board member, including the complainant.

 

7.  The complainant testified that he had no memory of the telephone poll, and that he didn’t know about the poll until he received a copy of the record indicating that he and the other members of the District had been called in July of 2004.

 

8.  However, the Commission is compelled to note that the complainant is relying on the handwritten record of the July, 2004 telephone poll meeting to show that such a poll occurred, while simultaneously denying the accuracy of the record insofar as it records that he was called and approved the loan of sick time.

 

9.  It is also found that the employee who was loaned the sick time specifically thanked the complainant for the loan of sick time at a political function in November of 2005, and that the complainant recognized and spoke to the employee at that time.

 

10.  The Commission specifically credits the testimony and evidence of the respondent and the employee, and specifically discredits the testimony of the complainant.

 

11.  It is concluded that the complainant had notice in fact of the July 2004 telephone poll in July of 2004 and again in November of 2005.  

 

12.  It is therefore concluded that the Commission lacks jurisdiction over this 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 April 23, 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:

 

Frank Smith

40 Chestnut Street

Suite 308

New Britain, CT 06051

           

Brian W. Armet,

Executive Director,

The Mattabassett District

c/o William W. Weber, Esq. and

Diane R. Chace, Esq.

Weber & Carrier, LLP

24 Cedar Street

New Britain, CT 06052

 

 

 

___________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

FIC/2007-290FD/paj/4/28/2008