FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 25, 2003, at which time the complainant and the respondent appeared 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 §1-200(1), G.S.

 

2.  It is found that the Finance Committee of the Town Council of Windsor held a special meeting on December 9, 2002, at 7:07 P.M., which the complainant attended and in which he participated during the Public Comment session.

 

3.  It is also found that the complainant receives prior notification of all town meetings from the office of the respondent, through a request of the complainant.  It is further found that the complainant received telephone notification of the meeting described in paragraph 2, above,  at approximately 9:11 A.M. on December 9, 2002.

 

4.  It is further found that, upon inquiry at the office of the Windsor Town Clerk, the complainant found notice of the meeting described in paragraph 2, above; however, such notice was not date or time-stamped.

 

5.  It is found that the fact that he could find no date-stamped copy of the meeting notice, coupled with the fact that he was not notified of the meeting until the morning of the meeting date, led the complainant to speculate that the meeting was not timely noticed.

 

6.  Accordingly, by letter dated January 8, 2003, and filed with the Commission on January 9, 2003, the complainant alleged that the town manager violated §1-225(d), G.S.  The complainant requested the imposition of a civil penalty against the respondent.

 

 

 

7.  Section 1-225(d), G.S., in relevant part provides:

 

“[n]otice 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….G.S.”

 

            8.  It is found that, under the Freedom of Information Act, the Finance Committee of the Windsor Town Council was the public agency, which had the duty to file notice of the special meeting described in paragraph 2, above, not the respondent.

 

            9.  Moreover, based upon the evidence presented at the hearing in this matter, the Commission cannot find that the notice for the meeting described in paragraph 2, above, was not timely filed.

 

            10.  It is concluded that the respondent did not violate the Freedom of Information Act, as alleged in the complaint.

 

            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.     

 

            2.  The complainant is advised that the Commission is experiencing a backlog of complaints, a reduction in budget, and staff cuts.  This matter might well have been resolved short of an evidentiary hearing, which resulted in a squandering of the scarce resources of this Commission as well as of the Town of Windsor.

 

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of September 24, 2003.

 

 

___________________________________

Ann B. Gimmartino

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:

 

Bradshaw Smith

23 Ludlow Road

Windsor, CT  06095-3635

 

Ralph Leon Churchill, Jr.,

Town Manager, Town of Windsor

275 Broad Street

Windsor, CT  06095

 

 

___________________________________

Ann B. Gimmartino

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

FIC/2003-009FD/mes/09/25/2003