TO:                  Freedom of Information Commission

 

FROM:            Thomas A. Hennick

 

RE:                  Minutes of the Commission’s regular meeting of August 24, 2011

           

 

A regular meeting of the Freedom of Information Commission was held on August 24, 2011, in the Freedom of Information Hearing Room, 18-20 Trinity Street, Hartford, Connecticut. The meeting convened at 2:05 p.m. with the following Commissioners present:

            

             Commissioner Norma E. Riess, presiding

             Commissioner Sherman D. London

             Commissioner Owen P. Eagan

             Commissioner Amy J. LiVolsi (participated via speakerphone)

             Commissioner Jay Shaw

                                                                                               

Also present were staff members, Mary E. Schwind, Clifton A. Leonhardt, Victor R. Perpetua, Tracie C. Brown, Kathleen K. Ross, Lisa F. Siegel, Valicia D. Harmon, Cindy Cannata and Thomas A. Hennick.

                    

            Those in attendance were informed that the Commission does not ordinarily record the remarks made at its meetings, but will do so on request.

 

            The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the minutes of the Commission’s regular meeting of August 10, 2011.  

 

 

Docket  #FIC 2010-672          Joshua Ramos v. Warden, State of Connecticut, Department of Correction, Northern Correctional Institution; and State of Connecticut, Department of Correction

 

 

              Joshua Ramos participated via speakerphone. Attorney Nancy Canney appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report. The proceedings were recorded digitally.

 

 

Docket  #FIC 2010-681          Michael Glen Smith v. Andrea Baker, Counselor Supervisor, State of Connecticut, Department of Correction, MacDougall-Walker Correctional Institution; and State of Connecticut, Department of Correction

 

 

                The matter was tabled.

 

Minutes, Regular Meeting, August 24, 2011

Page 2

 

 

 

 

Docket  #FIC 2010-594          Cherlyn Poindexter and the New Haven Management and Professional Union Local 3144 v. Board of Education, New Haven Public Schools

 

              The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.

 

 

Docket  #FIC 2010-595          John R. Cooke v. State of Connecticut, Division of Public Defender Services, Office of Chief Public Defender

 

               The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.

 

 

Docket  #FIC 2010-622          Mary Ellen DeRosa v. Coordinator, Management Information Systems, City of Milford; and City of Milford

 

              The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.

 

 

Docket  #FIC 2010-686          Connie Chen and Laura Piao v. Chief, Police Department,  City of New Haven; and Police Department,  City of New Haven

 

 

              The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.

 

 

Docket  #FIC 2010-699          Michael Nowacki v. State of Connecticut, Judicial Branch, Family Commission

 

               Michael Nowacki appeared on his own behalf. Attorney Martin Libbin appeared on behalf of the respondent. The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report. The proceedings were recorded digitally.


 

        Minutes, Regular Meeting, August 24, 2011

        Page 3

 

Docket  #FIC 2010-738          Richard L. Stone v. Board of Selectmen, Town of Cornwall; and Town of Cornwall

     

               Attorney Jeffrey Sienkiewicz and Richard Stone appeared on behalf of the complainant. Attorney Perley Grimes and Gordon Ridgway appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners voted, 4-1, to amend the Hearing Officers Report. The Commissioners voted, 4-1, to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report as amended.*  Commissioner Riess voted against the amendment and adoption. The proceedings were recorded digitally.

 

         

Docket  #FIC 2010-764          John Sylvia, III v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Public Safety, Legal Affairs Unit; and State of Connecticut, Department of Public Safety

 

 

              The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.

 

 

Docket  #FIC 2010-765          John Sylvia, III v. Administrator, State of Connecticut, Department of Correction, Freedom of Information Office; and State of Connecticut, Department of Correction

 

               The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.

 

 

Docket #FIC 2011-075           John Howard v. Chairman, Board of Education, Regional School District 14; and Board of Education, Regional District 14

 

 

               The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.

 

 

        Victor R. Perpetua reported on pending appeals.

                                                                                     

                                                 

                The meeting was adjourned at 3:25 p.m.

 

 

_________________

Thomas A. Hennick

 

 

*SEE ATTACHED FOR AMENDMENT

MINREGmeeting 08242011/tah/08252011

Minutes, Regular Meeting, August 24, 2011

Page 4

 

 

 

 

 

AMENDMENT

 

 

Docket  #FIC 2010-738          Richard L. Stone v. Board of Selectmen, Town of Cornwall; and Town of Cornwall

 

                                            

                   The Hearing Officer’s Report is amended as follows:

 

[23.  In this regard, it is found that the complainant was in a rather precarious position and that he may not have understood the implications of his participation.  However, there is nothing in the FOI Act that requires a public agency to provide an explanation or advise the complainant in this regard.]

 

             23. [24. Notwithstanding the complainant’s disadvantage, it]  It is found that the respondents provided the complainant with meaningful notice that his employment would be discussed within the meaning of 1-200(6)(A), G.S.  Accordingly, it is concluded that the respondents did not violate the FOI Act, as alleged by the complainant in this regard.

 

              24. [25.] Notwithstanding the conclusion in paragraph 16, above, the complainant’s request for relief is denied.