FREEDOM
OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
|
In the Matter of a Complaint by |
FINAL DECISION |
||
|
Alan C. Schmoll, |
|
||
|
|
Complainant |
|
|
|
|
against |
Docket #FIC 2000-377 |
|
|
School Building
Committee, Town of |
|
||
|
|
Respondents |
October 11, 2000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 16, 2000, at which time the complainant appeared, and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint. The respondent failed to appear.
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 §1-200(1),
G.S.
2. By letter dated July 17, 2000
and filed on July 19, 2000, the complainant appealed to the Commission,
alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information Act by improperly adding an item of business to the respondent’s June 27,
2000 meeting agenda, and thereafter, voting to approve a pay increase for the
Mayor’s aide.
The complainant takes issue with the lack of notice to the public.
In addition, the complainant contends that because the respondent does
not have regular meetings, then the June 27, 2000 meeting, and all of the
respondent’s meetings, are “special” meetings, during which, adding an
item of business to the agenda is prohibited.
3. It is found that the
respondent held a meeting on June 27, 2000 (hereinafter “meeting”) during
which it added the following item to the meeting agenda:
Item 6e.
Approval to fund temporary construction representative for the next 60
days, effective July 3, 2000 through September 1, 2000…
(hereinafter
“funding issue”).
4. It is found that the
respondent voted and approved the funding issue at the meeting.
5. Regarding noticing of meetings, §1-225(a), G.S., provides, in relevant part:
The chairman or secretary of any such public agency of any political subdivision of the state shall file, not later than January thirty-first of each year, with the clerk of such subdivision the schedule of regular meetings of such public agency for the ensuing year, and no such meeting of any such public agency shall be held sooner than thirty days after such schedule has been filed.
The agenda of the regular meetings of every public agency, … shall be available to the public and shall be filed, not less than twenty-four hours before the meetings to which they refer, in such agency's regular office or place of business or, if there is no such office or place of business … in the office of the clerk of such subdivision for any public agency of a political subdivision of the state …. Upon the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members of a public agency present and voting, any subsequent business not included in such filed agendas may be considered.
Notice of each special meeting of every public agency … shall be given not less than twenty-four hours prior to the time of such meeting by filing a notice of the time and place thereof in the office of the clerk of such subdivision for any public agency of a political subdivision of the state... The notice shall specify the time and place of the special meeting and the business to be transacted. No other business shall be considered at such meetings by such public agency. [Emphasis added.]
6. It is found that the respondent has not filed a “schedule of regular meetings” and therefore, does not have regular meetings, within the meaning of §1-225(a), G.S.
7. It is concluded that the mandatory language of §1-225(a), G.S., requires the filing of a “schedule of regular meetings”. It is also concluded that whereas §1-225(a), G.S., permits adding “subsequent business” to a regular meeting agenda, it expressly bars such addition in the case of “special meetings” (“No other business shall be considered at such meetings by such public agency.”) Further, the fact that a public agency does not actually meet (for whatever legitimate reason) on a date previously designated as a regular meeting date, in no way relieves such agency of the requirement of filing a “schedule of regular meetings”. Such schedule would indicate to the public the date the agency proposes to meet, and will in fact meet, if it has business to conduct when such dates arrives.
8. It is also concluded that the respondent’s meeting of June 27, 2000 was a “special” meeting, within the meaning of §1-225(a), G.S.
9. It is found that the funding issue constituted “other business”, within the meaning of §1-225(a), G.S., and therefore, by adding such item to the meeting agenda the respondent violated §1-225(a), G.S.
10. The complainant further contends that the approval of the funding issue at the meeting essentially accomplished what some members of the respondent, who are also members of the Hamden Legislative Council, failed to get approval on the day before at a Hamden Legislative Council meeting. Specifically, the complainant contends that a proposed pay raise for the Mayor’s aide was not approved by such council on June 26, 2000, however, certain members of such council, successfully approved a pay raise by adding the funding issue to the respondent’s June 27, 2000 meeting agenda.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of
the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:
1. The approval of funding at the June 27, 2000 meeting of the respondent, described more fully in paragraph 3 of the findings, above, is declared null and void pursuant to § 1-206(b)(2), G.S.
2. The respondent shall forthwith convene a properly noticed meeting, in accordance with the notice requirements of §1-225(a), G.S., should it wish to take up the funding issue again.
3. Forthwith, the respondent shall file a schedule of regular meetings in accordance with the requirements of §1-225(a), G.S.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of October 11, 2000.
_________________________
Dolores E. Tarnowski
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:
Alan C. Schmoll
75 Jackson Road
Hamden, CT 06517
School Building Committee, Town of
Hamden
Memorial Town Hall
2372 Whitney Avenue
Hamden, CT 06518
__________________________
Dolores E. Tarnowski
Clerk of the Commission
FIC2000-377FD/mes10132000