FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by Final Decision
Gregory M. Conte,
Complainant
against Docket
#FIC 95-85
Monroe Board of Finance,
Respondent December 27, 1995
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested
case on October 18, 1995, at which time the complainant and the respondent
appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and
argument on the complaint. The matter
was consolidated for purposes of hearing with Gregory M. Conte v. Monroe Board
of Finance, Docket #FIC 95-84.
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
dated March 17, 1995 and filed March 20, 1995, the complainant appealed to the
Commission and alleged that the respondent transacted business not contained on
its agenda for a special meeting.
3. It is
found that on January 25, 1995, the respondent noticed a series of special
meetings to discuss the proposed town budget over the course of the next six
weeks.
4. It is
found that pursuant to the notice described in paragraph 3, above, a budget
workshop session was scheduled for March 7, 1995 at 8:00 p.m.; and a budget
workshop session and vote were scheduled for March 8, 1995.
5. Section
1-21(a), G.S., provides, in pertinent part, that the notice of a special
meeting shall specify "the business to be transacted" and that
"no other business shall be considered at such meetings by such public
agency."
6. It is
found that on March 7, 1995, the respondent concluded its budget workshop
session and proceeded to vote on twenty-four separate items on the proposed
town budget.
#FIC 95-85 Page
2
7. It is
found that the respondent cancelled its special meeting noticed for March 8,
1995, which was the scheduled date for the budget vote.
8. It is
found that the respondent considered business at its March 7, 1995 special
meeting which was not set forth on its notice of special meeting; and it is
concluded therefore that the respondent violated the provisions of
1-21(a), G.S., with respect thereto.
The following order by the Commission is hereby
recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned
complaint:
1.
Henceforth, the respondent shall strictly comply with the provisions of
1-21(a), G.S., with respect to the conduct of its special meetings.
Approved by Order of the
Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of December 27, 1995.
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the
Commission
Docket #FIC 95-85 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:
Gregory M. Conte
136 Wheeler Road
Monroe, CT 06468
Monroe Board of Finance
c/o James White, Jr., Esq.
850 Main Street
Bridgeport, CT 06601
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the Commission