FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION

 

Sherman Beinhorn and the Middletown Press,

 

Complainants

 

against Docket #FIC 86-103

 

The Middletown Municipal Development Commission, Chairman of the Development Commisssion, Municipal Coordinator of the Development Commission and Councilman Dzialo of the Development Commission,

 

Respondents June 11, 1986

 

The above captioned matter was heard as a contested case on May 16, 1986, at which time the complainants 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:

 

1. The respondents are public agencies within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

2. By letter of complaint filed with the Commission on April 17, 1986 the complainant Beinhorn alleged that the respondents at their April 14, 1986 meeting convened in executive session for an improper purpose.

 

3. The respondents claim they convened in executive session for a proper purpose within the meaning of 1-18a(e)(4), G.S., to discuss the possible purchase of real estate by the City of Middletown.

 

4. It is found that the respondents convened in executive session at their April 14, 1986 meeting to discuss the College to Court Street block program and review in-house appraisals with respect to privately-owned properties in that area as well as strategy and negotiations concerning the purchase of some of those properties.

 

Docket #FIC 86-103 Page 2

 

5. The complainant Beinhorn argues that the development of the College to Court Street area is not immediate and that the meeting in question was "preliminary."

 

6. It is found that 1-18a(e)(4), G.S., does not precondition convening in executive session on whether a political subdivision anticipates the "immediate" lease, sale,

purchase or construction of property.

 

7. It is concluded that the respondents convened in executive session for a permissible purpose within the meaning of 1-18a(e)(4), 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 hereby dismissed.

 

Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of June 11, 1986.

 

Karen J. Haggett

Clerk of the Commission