FREEDOM OF
INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF
CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of
a Complaint by FINAL
DECISION
Sharon R.
Gabiga,
Complainant,
against Docket #FIC 88-127
First Selectman
and Second Selectman of the Town of Lisbon,
Respondents October 12, 1988
The above-captioned matter was heard
as a contested case on May 27, 1988, at which time the complainant and the
respondents 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 respondents are public agencies within the meaning of 1-18a(a),
G.S.
2.
By letter dated April 5, 1988, and filed with the Commission on April 6,
1988, the complainant appealed to the Commission, alleging the respondents held
an unnoticed meeting on March 8, 1988, for which no minutes were filed by March
14, 1988.
3.
It is found that on March 8, 1988, the respondents and the chairman of
the town recycling committee gathered to discuss with Felix Prokop his possible
appointment to the recycling committee.
4.
The respondents claim that the respondent second selectman attended this
gathering in his capacity as a member of the recycling committee, that the
respondents and the committee chairman are all members of the Democratic Town
Committee, and that they discussed only political aspects of appointing Mr.
Prokop to the committee.
5.
It is found that the respondent second selectman is a member of the
recycling committee and that the respondents and the recycling committee
chairman are members of the Democratic Town Committee.
6.
Nonetheless it is found that the respondents constitute a quorum of the
town board of selectmen.
Docket #88-127 Page Two
7.
It is further found that the appointment of members of the town
recycling committee is a matter over which the board of selectmen has
jurisdiction.
8.
It is found that the gathering was not a caucus, as defined by
1-18a(b), G.S., of the Democrats on the board of selectmen since two
people who were not Democratic members of the board of selectmen attended.
9.
It is also found that the gathering was not a political
"caucus" of the Lisbon Democratic Town Committee as it was not held
under its auspices.
10.
It is concluded that the discussion was a meeting of the board of
selectmen within the meaning of 1-18a(b), G.S.
11.
It is found that the respondents failed to file notice, an agenda or
minutes of the meeting.
12.
Thus it is concluded that the respondents violated 1-21(a), G.S.,
by holding a meeting without providing notice, an agenda, or minutes.
13.
It is found, however, that the minutes of the meeting would not have had
to have been filed by March 14, 1988, but within seven days of the meeting,
excluding Saturdays, Sundays and holidays, as required by 1-21(a)
& 1-21(b).
The following order by the
Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the
above-captioned complaint:
1.
The respondents henceforth shall act in strict compliance with
1-21(a), G.S.
2.
The respondents shall cause the final decision in this case to be read
aloud at the first public meeting of the Lisbon board of selectmen held after
they receive the notice of that final decision.
Approved by order of the Freedom of
Information Commission at its special meeting of October 12, 1988.
ÿ
Catherine H.
Lynch
Acting Clerk of the Commission