FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION

 

Michael S. Bracken, Jr.

 

Complainant

 

against Docket #FIC 87-239

 

Board of Police Commissioners of the Town of Windsor Locks,

 

Respondent December 9, 1987

 

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on September 17, 1987, 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:

 

1. The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

2. By letter of complaint filed with the Commission on August 25, 1987 the complainant alleged that on July 18, 1987 the respondent held a secret meeting for the purpose of reviewing the agility tests of candidates for the position of police officer. The complainant asked that any actions taken on that date by the respondent, including the agility test, be declared null and void.

 

3. It is found that on July 18, 1987 the police chief of the Town of Windsor Locks administered an agility test for prospective police officers. Due to the large number of candidates, the police chief asked members of the respondent for assistance in monitoring the several stations of the test. Three members of the respondent participated in the monitoring. A fourth was present for a short time to observe only.

 

4. The respondent provided no public notice of the July 18, 1987 gathering. The complainant claims he did not receive notice of the gathering until August, 1987, fewer than thirty days prior to the filing of his complaint.

 

5. It is found that the monitoring of stations of an agility test did not constitute discussion of or action upon a matter over which the respondent has supervision, control, jurisdiction or advisory power.

 

Docket #FIC 87-239 Page Two

 

6. It is concluded that the gathering of members of the respondent at the July 18, 1987 agility test did not constitute a meeting within the meaning of 1-18a(b), G.S.

 

7. It is further concluded that the respondent's failure to provide public notice of the July 18, 1987 gathering did not violate any provision of the Freedom of Information Act.

 

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 special meeting of December 9, 1987.

 

 

Catherine H. Lynch

Acting Clerk of the Commission