FREEDOM
OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
|
In the Matter of a Complaint by |
FINAL DECISION |
||
|
William Jones and Naugatuck |
|
||
|
|
Complainant |
|
|
|
|
against |
|
Docket #FIC 2000-061 |
|
Board of Fire
Commissioners, |
|
||
|
|
Respondents |
May 24, 2000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on March 24, 2000, at which time the complainants and the respondent appeared 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 dated February 10, 2000, and filed with the Commission on February 14, 2000, the complainants alleged that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act with respect to its February 7, 2000 meeting by convening in executive session to discuss the termination of a member of the respondent union without properly notifying the subject of such alleged discussion. By such letter, the complainants also alleged that the respondent violated the FOI Act by including on its previous agendas executive sessions concerning personnel matters, and improperly excluding the public from such previous meetings. It is concluded, however, that such allegation will not be considered herein, since it does not fairly apprise the respondent of the specific times and dates of such previous meetings, and since the FOI Act requires the filing of a complaint within 30 days of an alleged violation, pursuant to §1-206(b)(1), G.S. Accordingly, the complaint is limited to the allegation concerning the February 7, 2000 meeting of the respondent.
3. It is found that the respondent held a regular meeting on February 7, 2000, and that, during such meeting, it convened in executive session and discussed personnel matters.
4. Section 1-225(a), G.S., provides, in relevant part:
[t]he meetings of all public agencies, except executive sessions as defined in subdivision (6) of section 1-200, shall be open to the public….
5. Section 1-200(6), G.S., defines “executive session” to include:
…a meeting of a public agency at which the public is excluded for one or more of the following purposes: (A) Discussion concerning the appointment, employment, performance, evaluation, health or dismissal of a public officer or employee, provided that such individual may require that discussion be held at an open meeting.
6. It is found that, during the executive session described in paragraph 3, above, three non-union members of the staff of the Naugatuck fire department were discussed. It is further found that the respondent did not discuss the appointment, employment, performance, evaluation, health or dismissal of the complainant Jones or any members of the complainant Naugatuck Fire Fighters union, at such session.
7. It is therefore concluded that the respondent did not violate the FOI Act, as alleged in the complaint.
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 May 24, 2000.
_________________________
Melanie R. Balfour
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:
William Jones and Naugatuck Fire Fighters, Local 1219
c/o Louis P. DeMici
Uniformed Professional Fire Fighters Assoc. of Connecticut
30 Sherman Street
West Hartford, CT 06110
Board of Fire Commissioners, Borough of Naugatuck
c/o Atty. M. Leonard Caine, III
Caine & Caine
35 Porter Avenue
Naugatuck, CT 06770
__________________________
Melanie R. Balfour
Acting Clerk of the Commission
FIC2000-061FD/mrb/05/25/00