FREEDOM
OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF
THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In
the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL
DECISION
Neil
G. Gordes,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 94-83
Rocky
Hill Board of Tax Review,
Respondent March 8, 1995
The above-captioned matter was heard
as a contested case on July 25, 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.
2. By
letter of complaint filed March 23, 1994, the complainant appealed to the
Commission, alleging that the respondent met on March 2, 1994 without notice or
agenda.
3. It
is found that the complainant appealed his tax assessment to the respondent on
February 22, 1994.
4. It
is found that the complainant inquired at that time when a decision would be
made, and was informed that he would hear within two weeks.
5. It
is found that the respondent held special meetings on March 1, March 2, March
4, and March 5, 1994 to deliberate upon tax appeals.
6. It
is found that the secretary of the respondent by letter dated February 25, 1994
notified the town clerk that the respondent would be meeting on those dates in
March.
7. It
is found that the respondent's notice of the deliberation sessions does not
specify which taxpayers' appeals will be held on which dates.
8. The
complainant maintains that the notice of the meetings is therefore
insufficient.
Docket
#FIC 94-84 Page
2
9. The
respondent maintains that the notice of the meetings can not be more specific,
since the respondent can not know how many tax appeals it will deliberate on in
any given night.
10. The
respondent also maintains that taxpayers may contact the assessor's office to
determine what night the respondent will deliberate on their appeal.
11. On
its own motion, the Commission takes administrative notice of its record and
final decision in docket #FIC 93-121, Edward A. Peruta against Michael Egan,
James Sweeny and Wethersfield Board of Tax Review.
12. In
docket #FIC 93-121, the Commission concluded under a similar set of facts that
a board of tax review, given its governing statutes, did not violate
1-21(a), G.S., by failing to list every taxpayer appeal to be heard at a
deliberative meeting.
13. It
is therefore concluded that the respondent in this case did not violate
1-21(a), G.S., by failing to list the complainant's tax appeal on the
notice of meeting filed with the town clerk.
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 8, 1995.
Debra L.
Rembowski
Clerk of the
Commission
Docket
#FIC 94-83 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:
NEIL
G. GORDES
741
France Street
Rocky
Hill, CT 06067
ROCKY
HILL BOARD OF TAX REVIEW
699
Old Main Street
P.O.
Box 657
Rocky
Hill, CT 06067
Debra L.
Rembowski
Clerk of the Commission