FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
COMMISSION
OF
THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In
the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL
DECISION
Mario
Montouro,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 94-212
Cheryl
Reedy, New Fairfield First Selectman, and David Enos,
Alan
Murray, Nick Panayoutou and New Fairfield Code of Ethics Committee
Respondents October 12, 1994
The above-captioned matter was
heard as a contested case on August 18, 1994, 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 and conclusions of law are
reached:
1. The respondents are public agencies within the meaning of
1-18a(a), G.S.
2. By letter of complaint dated and filed with the Commission on
June 30, 1994, the complainant alleged that the respondents had failed to
comply with the Commission's June 22, 1994 order in contested case docket #FIC
94-36, Mario Montuoro v. New Fairfield First Selectman and New Fairfield Code
of Ethics Committee ("docket #FIC 94-36"), requiring the respondents
to provide the complainant with a copy of the New Fairfield Code of Ethics
Committee's October 23, 1993 meeting transcript.
3. The complainant requests that the Commission issue civil
penalties against the respondents.
4. The Commission takes administrative notice of its findings and
decision in docket #FIC 94-36.
5. The Commission's final decision in docket #FIC 94-36 states:
11. ...the respondents have in their possession
a transcript of the October 23, 1993 special meeting, which transcript had
previously been prepared by the secretary to the New Fairfield Board of Finance
from the now missing tapes.
Docket
#FIC 94-212 Page 2
6. It is found that subsequent to the Commission issuing its order
in docket #FIC 94-36, the respondent First Selectman provided the complainant
with a copy of the transcript prepared by Vivian Silvestri, the secretary to
the New Fairfield Board of Finance, referred to in paragraph 5, above.
7. However, it is found that the transcript prepared by Silvestri
and provided to the complainant does not pertain to the respondent New
Fairfield Board of Ethics Committee's October 23, 1993 meeting.
8. It is found that the transcript prepared by Silvestri concerns
the respondent New Fairfield Board of Ethics Committee's meetings of November 3
and 6, 1993, and not the meeting of October 23, 1993.
9. Based on the evidence and the entire record in this case, it is
found that no transcript of the October 23, 1993 meeting exists.
10. Consequently, it is concluded that the respondents did not
violate the Commission's order in docket #FIC 94-36, and therefore the request
for civil penalties is denied.
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. Nothing herein shall be construed to condone the loss of
the subject tapes and transcripts; and the Commission stresses that in the
future, the respondents should do all in their power to see that public records
are preserved.
Approved
by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its special meeting of
October 12, 1994.
Debra
L. Rembowski
Clerk
of the Commission
Docket
#FIC 94-212 Page 3
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:
MARIO
MONTOURO
132
Ball Pond Road
New
Fairfield, CT 06812
CHERYL
REEDY, NEW FAIRFIELD FIRST SELECTMAN and DAVID ENOS, ALAN MURRAY, NICK
PANAYOUTOU and NEW FAIRFIELD CODE OF ETHICS COMMITTEE
Route
39
P.O.
Box 8896
New
Fairfield, CT 06812
Route
39
Debra
L. Rembowski
Clerk of the Commission