FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by            Final Decision

 

Clyde A. Selner,

 

                        Complainant

 

            against              Docket #FIC 93-250

 

Berlin Planning Commission and Berlin Executive Board,

 

                        Respondents                 March 9, 1994

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on November 29, 1993, at which time the complainant and respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  The original caption for this case improperly designated the Berlin Zoning Commission as a respondent in this matter.  Therefore, the case caption has been changed to correctly identify the respondents in this matter.

 

            After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:

 

            1.         The respondents are public agencies within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

            2.         By letter dated September 2, 1993, and filed with the Commission September 7, 1993, the complainant alleged that the respondents had not fully or properly complied with his requests to mail him notice of their meetings.

 

            3.         By letter dated November 10, 1993, and filed with the Commission on November 12, 1993, the respondents alleged that Mr. Selner's complaint was frivolous and they requested the imposition of a monetary fine.

 

            4.         At the hearing on this matter the complainant withdrew his complaint as it relates to the respondent Berlin Planning Commission.

 

Docket #FIC 93-250                                     Page 2

 

            5.         It is found that the only remaining issue is whether 1-21c, G.S., requires the respondent board to enclose a copy of its agenda for its regular meetings in light of the 1-21(a), G.S., requirement that the notice of each special meeting "... specify the time and place of the special meeting and the business to be transacted .... "

 

            6.         Conn. Gen. Stat. 1-21(a) states in relevant part that:

 

            (a)  The agenda of the regular meetings of every public agency ... shall be filed, not less than twenty-four hours before the meetings to which they refer ....

 

            7.         Conn. Gen. Stat. 1-21c states in relevant part that:

 

            The public agency shall, where practicable, give notice by mail of each regular meeting, and any special meeting which is called, at least one week prior to the date set for the meeting, to any person who has filed a written request for such notice with such body, except that such body may give such notice as it deems practical of special meetings called less than seven days prior to the date set for the meeting.

 

            8.         It is found that neither 1-21(a), G.S., nor 1-21c, G.S., requires a public agency to provide copies of the agenda for any regular meeting earlier than twenty-four hours before the meeting to which it refers.

 

            9.         It is found that it is the practice of the respondent board to file the agenda for each of its regular meetings as soon as possible, but not later than twenty-four hours before the meeting to which it refers.

 

            10.       It is found that the respondent board always files its meeting agenda with the town clerk, who after date stamping the original agenda, posts it, and makes copies of it available upon request to members of the public.

 

            11.       It is further found that the town clerk's office routinely provides information about meeting agendas, including the respondent board's agendas, to persons making inquiry by telephone.

 

            12.       It is therefore concluded that the respondent has fully complied with the notice and agenda requirements for regular meetings as set forth in 1-21(a) and 1-21c, G.S.

 

Docket #FIC 93-250                                     Page 3

 

            13.       The Commission takes administrative notice of the case file, record and final decision in contested case docket #FIC 93-62, Clyde A. Selner against Berlin Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission.

 

            14.       Although the Commission finds that this appeal was frivolous, and taken without reasonable grounds, the facts of this case are insufficient to conclude that the appeal was taken solely for the purpose of harassing the respondent board.

 

            15.       Therefore, the Commission declines to impose a civil penalty against the complainant at this time.

 

            The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended

on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:

 

            1.         The complaint is dismissed.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of March 9, 1994.

 

                                                                 

                                    Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 93-250                                     Page 4

 

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:

Mr. Clyde A. Selner

32 Edgerly Street

Kensington, CT 06037

 

Berlin Planning Commission and

Berlin Executive Board

c/o E. Timothy Sullivan, Jr., Esq.

One Liberty Square

New Britain, CT 06051

 

                                                                 

                                    Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission