FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by Final Decision
William A. Falletti, Daniel Cole, Don Protheroe,
Merrill Simpson and Thomas Lackman,
Complainants
against Docket #FIC 95-43
Ashford Board of Finance,
Respondent November 8, 1995
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on September 21, 1995, at which time the complainants 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 with the Commission on February 22, 1995, the complainants appealed alleging that the respondent violated 1-21, G.S., of the Freedom of Information ("FOI") Act by failing to notify all of its members at least twenty four hours prior to the start of the special meetings held on January 26 and February 9, 1995 (hereinafter "special meetings").
The complainants also alleged various violations of 7-103 and 7-342, G.S., with respect to the special meetings.
3. It is found that this Commission has no jurisdiction to enforce the provisions of 7-103 and 7-342, G.S.
4. With respect to the allegation of a violation of 1-21, G.S., described in paragraph 2, above, it is found that the complainants are members of the respondent.
5. It is found that the respondent held special meetings on January 26 and February 9, 1995.
6. It is found that the respondent filed notice of the January 26 and February 9, 1995 special meetings with the town clerk on January 23 and February 7, 1995, respectively.
Docket #FIC 95-43 Page 2
7. Section 1-21(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that "written notice" of a special meeting shall be delivered to the usual place of abode of each member of the public agency so that it is received prior to the meeting.
8. The Commission takes administrative notice of the record and decision in contested case docket #FIC 90-175, Eileen M. Daily v. Westbrook Board of Selectmen.
9. In FIC 90-175 the Commission found that:
6. ...1-21 G. S., does not specify a time-frame for the delivery of notice of a meeting to members of the public agency that is holding the meeting; all that is required is that notice of the special meeting be delivered prior to the meeting in question.
10. It is found that the respondents delivered notice of the special meetings to the complainants prior to the start of each meetings, and further that the complainants received such written notice.
11. It is therefore concluded that the respondent did not violate the 1-21, G.S., with respect to delivery of notice to its members.
12. The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned compliant:
1. The complaint is hereby dismissed.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of November 8, 1995.
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC 95-43 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:
William Falletti
165 Mansfield Road
Ashford, CT 06278
Daniel Cole
20 Union Drive
Ashford, CT 06278
Don Protheroe
189 North Road
Ashford, CT 06278
Merril Simpson
137 Ference Road
Ashford, CT 06278
Thomas Lackman
14 Cushman Road
Ashford, CT 06278
Ashford Board of Finance
c/o Nicholas Kepple, Esq.
Kepple and Morgan
Box 3A Anguilla Park
20 South Anguilla Road
Pawcatuck, CT 06379
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the Commission