FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION

Susan Kniep and The Federation of

Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations, Inc.,

 
  Complainants  
  against   Docket #FIC 2007-646

Town Council,

Town of East Hartford,

 
  Respondent July 23, 2008
       

 

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on April 28, 2008, at which time the complainants 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 Town Council of the Town of East Hartford is a public agency within the meaning of §1-200(1), G.S.

 

2.      By e-mail dated November 27, 2007 and filed November 28, 2007, the complainants appealed to the Commission, alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information Act (“FOI Act”) by conducting its November 20, 2007 meeting without adequate notice that there would be a proposed sale of property located at 482-484 Burnside Avenue, in East Hartford. 

3.      Section 1-225(c), G.S., provides, in relevant part:

 

The agenda of the regular meeting of every public agency. . . shall be available to the public and shall be filed, not less than twenty-four hours before the meeting to which they refer, (1) in such agency’s regular office or place of business, and (2) . . . in the office of the clerk of such subdivision for any public agency of a political subdivision of the state or in the office of the clerk of each municipal member of any multitown district or agency.  Upon the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members of a public agency present and voting, any subsequent business not included in such filed agendas may be considered and acted upon at such meetings.

 

4.      It is found that the November 19, 2007 agenda for the respondent’s November 20, 2007 meeting lists as an item of discussion “Transfer of 478-482-484 Burnside Avenue and 550-560 Burnside Avenue to the East Hartford Redevelopment Agency.” 

 

5.      It is found that subsequent to the respondent discussing and approving the agenda item of transferring the property referred to in paragraph 4, above, to the East Hartford Redevelopment Agency, a motion was raised “to approve the sale of the property at 482-484 Burnside Avenue for $12,500.”  It is further found that this motion carried 7 to 0, with one member abstaining from the vote.

 

6.      It is further found that the topic of the sale of 482-484 Burnside Avenue, including permitting the Redevelopment Agency to sell said location for the price of $12,500, was discussed at several public meetings prior to the meeting in question.  It is further found that members of the public were present at these previous meetings, including Complainant Kniep, at which the subject of the sale of the property as well as the property’s proposed sale price had been discussed.  Specifically, it is found that Complainant Kniep attended an October 23, 2007 meeting of the Town Council’s Real Estate Acquisition and Disposition Committee, at which time the $12,500 sale price of 482-484 Burnside Avenue was discussed extensively and the complainant was given an opportunity to speak on this issue.

 

7.      Accordingly, it is concluded that the public had notice, prior to November 20, 2007 meeting, of the pending sale as well as of the contemplated sale price of 482-484 Burnside Avenue.   

 

8.      Although the complainants assert that the attendance at the November 20, 2007 meeting of the respondent would have been higher if the sale of the property had been placed on the November 19, 2007 agenda, it is found that such assertion is based merely upon speculation.

 

9.      Based on the facts and circumstances of this case, it is found that the agenda of the November 20, 2007 meeting was specific enough to fairly apprise the public that the respondent would discuss and possibly vote to put forward the issue of approving the Redevelopment Agency’s sale of the property located at 482-484 Burnside Avenue for the price of $12,500. 

 

10.  Accordingly it is concluded that the respondent did not violate the FOI Act as alleged.

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 July 23, 2008.

 

 

____________________________

S. Wilson

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:

 

Susan Kniep and The Federation of

Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations, Inc.

50 Old Roberts Street

East Hartford, CT 06108

 

Town Council,

Town of East Hartford

c/o Scott R. Chadwick, Esq.

Corporation Counsel and

Frank N. Cassetta, Esq.

Assistant Corporation Counsel

Town of East Hartford

740 Main Street

East Hartford, CT 06108

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

____________________________

S. Wilson

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

FIC/2007-646FD/sw/7/28/2008