FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by

FINAL DECISION

Evelyn V. Russo,

 

Complainant

 

 

against

Docket #FIC 2000-378

Charter Revision Commission, City of Middletown,

 

 

Respondent

 February 28, 2001

 

 

 

 

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on October 4, 2000, at which time the complainant and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  For purposes of hearing, the above-caption matter was consolidated with docket #s FIC 2000-379, V. James Russo v. Charter Revision Commission, City of Middletown; FIC2000-380, Joseph E. Milardo, Jr. v. Charter Revision Commission, City of Middletown; FIC 2000-382, Andrew Rak v. Charter Revision Commission, City of Middletown; FIC 2000-383, David Roane v. Charter Revision Commission, City of Middletown; and FIC 2000-384, John S. Uccello, Charter Revision Commission, City of Middletown.

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 19, 2000 and filed on July 20, 2000, the complainant appealed to this Commission alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act in the following manner:

 

a.       “ . . .[d]id not publish a proper notice of its meeting schedule as required by law;

b.      did not hold its meeting of June 22, 2000 in conformity with the schedule of public meetings filed with Middletown’s Town Clerk on April 4, 2000;

c.       failed to provide a proper notice of the time of its meeting of June 22, 2000 which had to have been a special meeting since it was called for an unspecified time following a scheduled public hearing but not at the time noticed for meetings of the commission on April 4, 2000.”

 

The complainant requested that this Commission declare null and void or otherwise invalidate the actions taken by the respondent commission at its June 22, 2000 meeting.

 

3.      With respect to the complainant’s allegation described in paragraph 2a, above, §1-225(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that:

 

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 . . . .

 

4.      It is found that the respondent commission was established by the Common Council of the City of Middletown on or about April 3, 2000 for the sole purpose of revising the city charter.

 

5.      It is found that on or about April 4, 2000, the respondent commission filed a schedule of its regular meetings with the town clerk which established by memo that its meetings would be held on “Tuesday or Thursday of each week at 6:00 p.m. at various locations dependent upon available rooms, on an as need basis . . .”  with the first meeting scheduled for “. . . Tuesday, April 18, 2000 at 6 p.m. in the Police Community Room.”

 

6.      It is found that the schedule filed by the respondent commission is vague and does not meaningfully apprise the public of the respondent commission’s regular meeting dates and times in accordance with the requirements of §1-225(a), G.S.

 

7.      It is concluded therefore that although the respondent commission acted in good faith it violated the provisions of §1-225(a), G.S., in this case.

 

8.      With respect to the complainant’s allegations described in paragraphs 2b and 2c, §1-225(a), G.S., further provides in relevant part that:

 

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 Secretary of the State for any such public agency of the state, in the office of the clerk of such subdivision for any public agency of a political subdivision of the state . . . Such notice shall be given not less than twenty-four hours prior to the time of the special meeting . . . [t]he 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 meeting by such public agency. . . .

 

9.      It is found that the respondent commission filed the notice of its June 22, 2000 meeting on June 16, 2000 which stated that “the Charter Revision Commission will hold a meeting on Thursday, June 22, 2000 at the conclusion of the public hearing . . . .” The public hearing was noticed to begin at 7:00 p.m., on June 22, 2000, in the Police Community Room, Middletown Police Station, Main Street.

 

10.  It is also found that while the exact time of the June 22, 2000 meeting was not cited, such notice was reasonable under the circumstances and sufficiently provided the public of the time that the meeting would commence.

 

11.  It is also found that the respondent filed the notice of, and the agenda for, its June 22, 2000 meeting at least twenty-fours hours prior to said meeting and there is no evidence that the respondent commission conducted any business other than that which was listed on its agenda.

 

12.  It is concluded that the respondent commission complied with the special meeting requirements of §1-225(a), G.S.

 

13.  Notwithstanding the conclusion set forth in paragraph 7, above, the Commission declines to declare null and void the actions taken by the respondent commission at its June 22, 2000 meeting, as requested by the complainant.

 

 

On the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint, no order is recommended by the Commission. 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of February 28, 2001.

 

 

_________________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

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:

 

Evelyn V. Russo

108 High Street

Middletown, CT 06457

 

Charter Revision Commission

City of Middletown

c/o Timothy P. Lynch, Esq.

Deputy City Attorney

245 DeKoven Drive

PO Box 1300

Middletown, CT 06457

 

 

 

________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

FIC/2000-378/FD/paj/03/01/2001