FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION
Albert H. Trowbridge,
Complainant,
against Docket #FIC 89-451
Board of Education for Regional School District #12,
Respondent July 25, 1990
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on April 16, 1990, at which time the complainant and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint. This case was consolidated for hearing with Docket ##'s FIC 89-449, 89-450, 89-458, 89-460 and 89-464.
After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:
1. The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.
2. By letter filed with the Commission on December 4, 1989, the complainant appealed to the Commission, alleging the respondent's Policies and Bylaws Committee held an unnoticed meeting.
3. It is found that three members of the respondent make up the committee.
4. It is found that at the November 13, 1989, regular meeting of the full board, a member of the committee reported on several changes to the respondent's policies and by-laws.
5. It is found that on a Saturday morning before November 13, 1989, two members of the committee had met to discuss certain personnel matters in a publicly noticed special meeting of the committee.
6. It is found, however, that the third member of the committee was never notified individually of this meeting.
7. It is found that the discussion veered into policy matters and the two committee members present decided to do some editorial work on the existing written policies and by-laws and then present their changes to the full board.
Docket #FIC 89-451 Page Two
8. It is found that two members constitute a quorum of the committee.
9. It is found that the respondent's policies and by-laws are a matter over which this committee has advisory power.
10. It is also found that the respondent failed to prove the two committee members present at that meeting ever voted to add their policy discussion or editing to the meeting's agenda.
11. It is concluded, therefore, that the respondent's committee violated 1-21(a), G.S., by having a special meeting without individually notifying all committee members and by taking up a non-agenda item at that meeting.
The following order of the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the entire record in the above-captioned complaint:
1. The respondent shall instruct the members of its Policies and Bylaws Committee to comply strictly in the future with the requirements of 1-21(a), G.S.
2. The respondent shall require the members of its Policies and Bylaws Committee to attend an educational workshop to be held by a Commission staff attorney within 60 days of the mailing of the notice of final decision in this case.
Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of July 25, 1990.
Tina C. Frappier
Acting Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC 89-451 Page Three
PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:
ALBERT H. TROWBRIDGE
Old Litchfield Road
Washington, CT 06793
BOARD OF EDUCATION FOR REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT #12
c/o Michael E. Foley, Esq.
Shipman & Goodwin
799 Main Street
Hartford, CT 06103
Tina C. Frappier
Acting Clerk of the Commission