FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION
Russell J. Quinlan
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 94-288
Connecticut Development Authority
Respondent December 29, 1994
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on December 1, 1994, at which time the complainant 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 and conclusions of law are reached:
1. The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S., as is its loan committee.
2. In its final decision in contested case docket #FIC 93-216, involving the same parties, the Commission ordered the respondent's loan committee to "create minutes of its April 21, 1993 meeting, which minutes shall at a minimum include the time, date and location of the meeting, and which shall identify the members of the respondent committee who were present at the meeting, the loan requests that were discussed thereat and the votes, if any, whether formal or informal of the respondent committee members."
3. By letter dated August 18, 1994, and filed with the Commission on August 22, 1994, the complainant appealed to the Commission alleging that the respondent failed to comply with the quoted portion of the Commission's order in its docket #FIC 93-216.
4. Specifically, the complainant claims that the respondent failed to comply with the Commission's order by not identifying in the minutes of its loan committee's April 21, 1993 meeting each staff member present at that meeting.
5. It is found that the respondent caused to be prepared minutes of its loan committee's April 21, 1993 meeting which complies fully with the Commission's order in its docket #FIC 93-216.
Docket #FIC 94-288 Page 2
6. Under the facts of this case, it is found that there is no requirement in the Freedom of Information Act that the respondent's committee identify in its minutes those staff members who were present at the meeting in question.
7. Consequently, it is concluded that the respondent did not violate the Commission's order in its docket #FIC 93-216.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:
1. The complaint is hereby dismissed.
2. The Commission notes that in the minutes of the respondent's loan committee meeting of April 21, 1993, decisions on various recommendations are reflected as being the "consensus of the committee." The Commission advises the respondent that 1-21(a), G.S., requires a public agency to record the votes of each agency member, upon any issue before the agency, in the minutes of the meeting to which they refer; and that the word "consensus" does not fulfill the requirement for the recording of votes set forth in 1-21(a), G.S.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of December 28, 1994.
Debra L. Rembowski
Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC 94-288 Page 3
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:
RUSSELL J. QUINLAN
Quinlan's Inc.
82 Camp Street
P.O. Box 735
Meriden, CT 06450
CONNECTICUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
c/o John Mahoney, Esq.
Shipman & Goodwin
One American Row
Hartford, CT 06103
Debra L. Rembowski
Clerk of the Commission