FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on March 7, 2006, 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-captioned matter was consolidated with docket #FIC 2005-566, Deborah A. Carrier v. Board of Education, Torrington Public Schools; and docket #FIC2005-604, Joanne Avoletta v. Board of Education, Torrington Public Schools.

 

            After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:

 

            1.  It is found that, until November 2005, the complainant was a parent representative member of the respondent.

 

2.  It is found that the complainant was denied access to gatherings of the respondent conducted on November 30, 2005, and December 12, 2005.

 

3.  By letter dated and filed on December 13, 2005, the complainant appealed to the Commission, alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information [hereinafter “FOI”] Act by denying her attendance at the gatherings described in paragraph 2, above. 

 

4.  Section 1-225(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that: “[t]he meetings of all public agencies…shall be open to the public….”

 

5.  Section 1-200(2), G.S., defines “meeting” as:

 

“…any hearing or other proceeding of a public agency, any convening or assembly of a quorum of a multimember public agency, and any communication by or to a quorum of a multimember public agency, whether in person or by means of electronic equipment, to discuss or act upon a matter over which the public agency has supervision, control, jurisdiction or advisory power.  “Meeting” does not include . . . an administrative or staff meeting of a single-member public agency….” 

 

Emphasis added.

 

            6.  The complainant contends that the respondent was created pursuant to Public Act No. 03-220, which requires local and regional boards of education to adopt and implement an indoor air quality [hereinafter “IAQ”] program that provides for ongoing maintenance and facility reviews necessary to maintain and improve such facilities.  It is found, however, that the respondent was not created by the Torrington Board of Education pursuant to such Act, but rather was formed by the Torrington Superintendent of Schools [hereinafter “superintendent”] in 2002. 

 

            7.  It is found that the respondent is comprised mostly of members of the superintendent’s staff, such as teachers, maintenance workers, school administrators, food service workers, and school nurses, but at times has included parent representatives or other members of the community.  It is found that the superintendent’s staff performs the bulk of the respondent’s work during the school day, when they conduct tests and inspections, in order to monitor the IAQ.  It is also found that the reports generated by such staff members are compiled and discussed at gatherings of the respondent, which are scheduled from time to time at school buildings. 

 

            8.  It is found that the superintendent is a “single member public agency,” within the meaning of §1-200(2), G.S.

 

9.  Based on the facts and circumstances of this case, it is found that the November 30, 2005 and December 12, 2005 gatherings, described in paragraph 2, above, constituted “administrative or staff meetings” of a single member public agency, within the meaning of §1-200(2), G.S., and that, therefore, such gatherings were not “meetings,” within the meaning of such provision.   

 

10.  The Commission finds it unfortunate, and not in keeping with the spirit of the FOI Act and open government, that the respondent excluded the complainant, a parent involved in IAQ issues in Torrington, from the November 30, 2005 and December 12, 2005 gatherings.  However, since such gatherings were not “meetings” within the meaning of §1-200(2), G.S., it is concluded that the respondent did not violate §1-225(a), G.S., 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.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of July 26, 2006.

 

________________________________

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:

 

Deborah A. Carrier

135 Calhoun Street

Torrington, CT 06790

 

Tools for Schools Committee,

Torrington High School, Board

of Education, Torrington Public

Schools

c/o Victor M. Muschell, Esq.

104 Church Street

Torrington, CT 06790-5286

 

 

___________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

 

FIC/2005-599FD/paj/8/2/2006