FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL
DECISION
Charles Dixon and the Waterbury Republican and
American,
Complainants
against Docket
#FIC 87-328
Naugatuck Board of Mayor and Burgesses,
Respondent March
29, 1988
The above-captioned
matter was heard as a contested case on January 19, 1988, at which time the
complainants 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:
1. The respondent is a public agency within the
meaning of §1-18a(a), G.S.
2. On October 15, 1987, the respondent held a
special meeting at which it convened in executive session.
3. By letter of complaint dated October 19,
1987 and filed with the Commission on October 22, 1987, the complainants
alleged the respondent wrongfully denied the public the right to attend a
portion of its October 15, 1987 special meeting in violation of the Freedom of
Information Act.
4. The respondent claims it permissibly
convened in executive session to discuss strategy and negotiations with respect
to pending claims and litigation under §1-18a(e)(2), G.S.
5. It is found the respondent convened in
executive session, on the advice of its attorney, to discuss the legality of
the retroactive application of a proposed snake ordinance, including the
possibility of litigation being brought against the respondent board should it
adopt the snake ordinance.
6. It also is found that there are no pending
claims or litigation to which any of the respondents is a party, within the
meaning of §1-18a(e)(2), G.S.
Docket #FIC 87-328 Page 2
7. It
therefore is concluded that the respondent board did not convene in
executive session for a proper purpose, in violation of §§1-18a(e) and 1-21(a),
G.S.
The following order by
the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the
above-captioned complaint:
1. Henceforth, the respondent shall act in
strict compliance with the requirements of §§1-18a(e) and 1-21(a), G.S.
2. The respondent board, within two months from
the date it receives notice of the final decision in this matter, shall contact
the Commission to arrange for one of its' staff attorneys to conduct an
educational workshop on the requirements of the Freedom of Information
Act. The respondent board shall make
every effort to have all of its members attend the workshop.
Approved by order of
the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of March 23, 1988.
Catherine
H. Lynch
Acting
Clerk of the Commission