FREEDOM OF
INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF
CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of
a Complaint by FINAL DECISION
Fred Radford,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 86-236
Trumbull
Planning and Zoning Commission, Chairman, Trumbull Planning and Zoning Commission,
Clerk of the Trumbull Planning and Zoning Commission and Zoning Board of
Appeals and Trumbull First Selectman,
Respondents November 18, 1986
The above captioned matter was heard
as a contested case on September 25, 1986, at which time 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.
By letter of complaint dated August 26, 1986, and filed with the
Commission on August 27, 1986, the complainant alleged that the respondents
failed to file a "transcript" of their meetings held on July 23,
1986, August 5, 1986 and August 11, 1986 in violation of the Freedom of
Information Act.
3.
At the hearing before the Commission, the respondents conceded that the
minutes of the meetings in question were not filed within the time periods
mandated by 1-21(a), G.S., and agreed to provide the complainant with
copies of the minutes for the three meetings.
4.
The respondents explained that the minutes were not filed on time
because they have to comply with other notice requirements in accordance
8-7, G.S., and they "physically do not have the skilled staff to
comply with both requirements."
Docket #FIC
86-236
Page 2
5.
The Commission notes, however, that 1-21(a), G.S., states in
relevant part, "minutes shall be available for public inspection within
seven days of the session to which they refer," and that this statutory
provision is equally important.
6.
The Commission also notes that the minimal requirements of 1-21(a),
G.S. do not require public agencies to transcribe in such complete detail their
proceedings, as alleged in the complainant's letter of complaint.
7.
The Commission declines to impose a civil penalty against the
respondents as requested by the complainant.
The following order is hereby
recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned case:
1.
The respondents shall henceforth act in strict compliance with the
requirements of 1-21(a), G.S.
Approved by order of the Freedom of
Information Commission at its special meeting of November 18, 1986.
ÿ
Karen J.
Haggett
Clerk Of the Commission