FREEDOM
OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF
THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by Final
Decision
Joan Coe,
Complainant
against Docket
#FIC 1995-299
Eno Farms Cooperative
Association,
Respondent August
14, 1996
The above-captioned matter was heard
as a contested case on March 11 and May 13, 1996, at which times the
complainant and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain facts and
presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.
After consideration of the entire
records, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:
1. By letter of complaint dated August 19,
1995 and filed with the Commission on August 24, 1995, the complainant appealed
to the Commission alleging that the respondent is a public agency and violated
the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act by:
a. holding a meeting on August 16, 1995 without
notice or an agenda of such meeting;
b. convening in executive session on August 16,
1995 without notice of the purpose of such session;
c. allowing non-voting members of the
respondent to attend the executive session described in b., above; and
d. failing to make available minutes of its
meetings.
2. The four criteria to determine whether
the respondent is a “public agency” are:
a. whether the entity performs a governmental
function;
b. the level of government funding;
c. the extent of government involvement and
regulation; and
d. whether the entity was created by
government.
3. It is found that the respondent is a
non-stock, non-profit cooperative association, created on December 28, 1993 in
accordance with §47-200
et seq., G.S., commonly known as the Common Interest Ownership Act.
4. Pursuant
to §47-202
(10), G.S., “cooperative” means a common interest community in which the real
property is owned by an association, each of whose members is entitled by
virtue of his ownership interest in the association to exclusive possession of
a unit.
5. It
is found that the members of the respondent are the residents occupying the
units at Eno Farms Cooperative, (hereinafter “common interest community”).
6. It
is found that the members of the respondent presently comprise approximately
fifty families.
7. It
is found that the respondent’s function is to manage and govern the affairs of
the common interest community and the respondent.
8. It
is found that the respondent, pursuant to its by-laws is governed by an
executive board (hereinafter “board”), which board members are elected by the
members of the respondent from its membership.
9. It
is found that the respondent is self directed and its employees are not
government employees.
10. It is concluded that the respondent does
not perform a governmental function.
11. It is found that the respondent is funded solely by the
cooperative fees paid by its members.
12. It is found that the land upon which the common interest
community is constructed is owned by the town of Simsbury (“town”); that the
town leased such land to CIL Housing of Simsbury Incorporated (“CIL”), a
Connecticut corporation; that CIL subsequently assigned such lease to Eno Farms
Limited Partnership, ( a Connecticut limited partnership) the developer of the
community; and that the limited partnership subleased the land to the
respondent.
13. It is found that the buildings constructed on the land are
owned by the limited partnership, described in paragraph 12, above, and such
buildings are leased to the respondent.
14. It is concluded that while the land, as described in
paragraphs 12 and 13 is publicly owned, the respondent does not receive any
public funds at this time.
15. It is found that the common interest community is designed to
meet the requirements of the Qualified Low-Income Housing Program under section
42 of the Internal Revenue Code. Accordingly,
there are certain reporting requirements, such as the reporting of the income
of each member of the respondent.
16. It is concluded that the respondent is not subject to
substantial government involvement and regulation.
17. It is also concluded that the respondent was not created by
government.
18. It is therefore concluded that the respondent is not a public
agency within the meaning of §1-18a(a),
G.S.
19. Consequently, the respondent is not subject to the open
meeting and records provisions of the FOI ACT.
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.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of
Information Commission at its regular meeting of August 14, 1996.
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the Commission
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:
Joan Coe
26 Whitcomb Drive
Simsbury, CT 06070
Eno Farms Cooperative Association
c/o Helga M. Woods, Esq.
Rome, McGuigan, Sabanosh, and Klebanoff,
P.C.
One State Street
Hartford, CT 06103
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the Commission