FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by Final Decision

Harvey M. Goldstein,

Complainant

against Docket #FIC 87-205

President, Branford Point Association and Branford Point Association,

Respondents September 23, 1987

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 17, 1987, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.

After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found:

1. By letter dated July 10, 1987, the complainant requested copies of the respondent association's bylaws and a list of the names, addresses and telephone numbers of the respondent association's members.

2. By letter dated July 15, 1987, the respondent president provided the complainant with a copy of the respondent association's bylaws and constitution, but refused to provide him with a list of the names, addresses and telephone numbers of the respondent association's members.

3. By letter of complaint dated July 22, 1987 and filed with the Commission on July 24, 1987, the complainant alleged the respondents violated the Freedom of Information Act in their refusal to provide him with a list of the names and addresses of the respondent association's members.

4. At the hearing, the respondents moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground the Commission lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the complaint since the respondents are not public agencies within the meaning of §1-18a(a), G.S.

5. It is found the respondents were not created by a state or municipal governmental agency.

Docket #FIC 87-205 Page 2

6. It also is found the respondents are funded through membership dues and donations, and therefore are not funded by a state or municipal governmental agency.

7. It also is found the respondents' goals are to preserve the neighborhood, to foster community spirit and neighborhood identity, and to insure the needs of the community are brought to the attention of public officals and therefore they do not perform per se a governmental function.

8. It further is found the respondents are neither regulated nor subject to involvement by a state or municipal governmental agency.

9. It is concluded the respondents are not public agencies within the meaning of §1-18a(a), G.S., and therefore the Commission lacks subject matter jurisdiction over 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 special meeting of September 23, 1987.

Catherine H. Lynch

Acting Clerk of the Commission