FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by FINAL
DECISION
Cyrus Gaeta,
Complainant
against Docket
No. FIC 86-23
Richard Farmer, Edward
Guenther, Donald Stone and Timothy Horan, Chairman, of the Madison Board of
Police Commissioners,
Respondents March
26, 1986
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on
February 14, 1986 and continued to March 3, 1986, at which times the
complainant and the respondents appeared 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. The
respondent board held a regular meeting on January 16, 1986, the agenda for
which included the item "Any Proper Old Business."
3. At the
January 16, 1986, meeting the respondent board, as a part of "old
business," took up the matter of "MRT Training," eventually
convening in executive session to discuss the performance of the complainant,
the chief of police, with respect to the MRT Training. Following the executive session, the
respondent board reconvened in public session and voted to suspend the
complainant for one day.
4. By letter
of complaint filed with the Commission on January 29, 1986, the complainant
alleged that the matter of a disciplinary action against him was not included
on the agenda of the January 16, 1986 meeting and that he was not personally
notified that disciplinary action would be discussed or taken on that
date. The complainant requested that
all actions taken at the January 16, 1986 meeting concerning him be declared
null and void and that the Commission impose a civil penalty against the
respondent board.
Docket #86-23 Page
Two
5. It is found
that the complainant was present at the January 16, 1986 meeting during
discussion of the MRT training. As the
discussion developed and the performance of the complainant became an issue the
complainant became uncomfortable with the public nature of the discussion. Largely as a result of the complainant’s
discomfort, the respondent board moved into executive session. While convened in executive session the
complainant voiced his objection to having been discussed in public.
6. It is found
that the respondent board did not vote, pursuant to §1-21a, G.S., to consider
business not included in the agenda filed for the January 16, 1986
meeting. The Commission rejects the
respondent board’s claim that a motion to convene in executive session to
discuss the complainant’s performance was the equivalent of voting to consider
a non-agenda matter.
7. It is
concluded that the respondent violated §1-21(a), G.S., when it
failed to obtain an affirmative vote of two-thirds of its members present and
voting to discuss the complainant’s performance with respect to MRT training.
8. It is
found, however, that the complainant had complete access to attend both the
public and executive session portions of the discussion.
9. The
Commission, therefore, declines to declare null and void the respondent board’s
action with respect to the complainant, or to impose a civil penalty, as
requested by the complainant.
10. The Commission
also notes that under the Freedom of Information Act the complainant had no
right to require that the respondent board conduct its discussion of his
performance in executive session.
Furthermore, having convened in executive session at the complainant’s
urging, the complainant had no right to attend the executive session except to
the extent that his testimony or opinion was required by the respondent board.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended
on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint.
1. The respondent
shall, henceforth, at each regular meeting, obtain an affirmative vote of
two-thirds of its members present and voting prior to considering and acting
upon business not included in the agenda filed for such meeting, as required by
§1-21(a), G.S.
Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission
at its regular meeting of March 26, 1986.
___________________
Karen
J. Haggett
Clerk
of the Commission