In the Matter of a Complaint by


Karen Massaro,






Docket #FIC 2001-319

Board of Fire Commissioners,
Allingtown Fire District,




September 12, 2001





            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on July 30, 2001, 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 dated June 20, 2001, and filed with the Commission on June 26, 2001, the complainant alleged that the respondent board failed to comply with the notice of meeting requirements of the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act with respect to a special meeting that was noticed for June 16, 2001 and by not holding the meeting as indicated in the notice.


            3.  At the hearing on this matter, the respondent moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that it did not allege a violation of the FOI Act and that the complainant failed to prove that such a violation occurred.  The motion to dismiss is hereby denied because the complaint fairly alleges a violation of the FOI Act (see Perkins v. FOI Commission, 228 Conn. 158, 167 (1993):  “It would be unreasonable to deny a member of the public access to the FOIA simply because of arguable imperfections in the form in which a request . . . is couched.”) and for the reasons set forth below.

Docket #FIC 2001-319                                                                                               Page 2

            4.  It is found that on Friday morning June 15, 2001, the respondent board filed with the acting clerk of the Allingtown Fire District (a political subdivision of the state) a notice of special meeting to be held at either 3:00 or 3:30 p.m. on Saturday, June 16, 2001 at the district’s fire house.


            5.  It is also found that the acting clerk posted the notice of special meeting on the door to the fire house and that the clerk’s office is located in the fire house.  It is unclear whether the acting clerk also posted the notice on the door to the clerk’s office.


            6.  It is further found that the fire house was closed to the public on June 15, 2001.


            7.  In addition, it is found that some unknown person or persons crossed out the time of the special meeting on the posted notice of special meeting after attempting to change the stated time to 2:30 p.m.


            8.  It is further found that associates of the complainant arrived at the fire house on June 16, 2001 at approximately 2:45 p.m., that the complainant arrived at approximately 3:00 p.m. and that no meeting of the respondent board occurred while these individuals were present.


            9.  It is further found that the special meeting of the respondent board did convene at between approximately 3:35 p.m. and 3:45 p.m. on June 16, 2001 and that no one other than members of the respondent board and their attorney were present.


            10.  Section 1-225(d), G.S., provides in material part:


“Notice of each special meeting of every public agency, except for the General Assembly, either house thereof or any committee thereof, shall be given not less than twenty-four hours prior to the time of such meeting by filing a notice of the time and place thereof in the office . . .  of the clerk of such subdivision for any public agency of a political subdivision of the state. . . .  The secretary or clerk shall cause any notice received under this section to be posted in his office.  Such notice shall be given not less than twenty-four hours prior to the time of the special meeting. . . .  The notice shall specify the time and place of the special meeting and the business to be transacted. . . .”





Docket #FIC 2001-319                                                                                               Page 3



            11.  Section 1-225(g), in turn, provides that:


“In determining the time within which or by when a notice . . . of a special meeting [is] required to be filed under this section, Saturdays, Sundays, legal holidays and any day on which the office of the agency, the Secretary of the State or the clerk of the applicable political subdivision or the clerk of each municipal member of any multitown district or agency, as the case may be, is closed, shall be excluded.”


            12.  Although it is clear that the respondent board attempted to comply with the notice of special meeting requirements of the FOI Act, it is concluded that it nonetheless violated §§1-225(d) and (g), G.S., by failing to provide the minimum advance notice mandated by these sections when it filed notice of the meeting in question on the Friday preceding the Saturday meeting.  Given the evidence that the fire house where the clerk’s office is located was closed to the public on the Friday preceding the meeting in question, there is certainly an additional issue as to when the notice of that meeting had to have been filed and posted in order to have complied with the foregoing statutory provisions.


            13.  The Commission takes notice of the “Memorandum of Decision Motion To Dismiss:  Mandamus” issued in the case of Sampieri v. Haley, Super. Ct. JD Ansonia/Milford at Milford, CV01 0074925S, July 23, 2001 (Arnold, J.).



            The following is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:


            1.  In light of the foregoing, no order by the Commission is deemed necessary.


2.  The Commission, however, cautions the respondent board to be more mindful of the technical requirements of the FOI Act when it decides to hold a special meeting.  In this regard, the Commission urges the respondent to maximize the time within which it provides notice to the public of its special meetings, particularly where, as in this case, the meeting will address a matter of significant interest or controversy within the district.  In addition, the Commission urges the respondent board to look into the issues of public access to the district clerk’s office and where notices of meetings will be posted.  Obviously, there must be some concern that front door posting may lead to vandalism of any notice, as might have occurred in this instance.







Docket #FIC 2001-319                                                                                                Page 4



Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of September 12, 2001.




Petrea A. Jones

Acting Clerk of the Commission

Docket #FIC 2001-319                                                                                                Page 5







Karen Massaro

8 Chris-Jon Circle

West Haven, CT 06516


Board of Fire Commissioners,

Allingtown Fire District

c/o Robert E. Arnold, Esq.

412 Orange Street

New Haven, CT 06511




Petrea A. Jones

Acting Clerk of the Commission