FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION
Christopher Hoffman and New Haven Register,
Complainants
against Docket #FIC 94-102
James J. McGrath, Chief of Police, Ansonia Police Department
and Eugene K. Baron, Howard F. Tinney, Sr., Brian Phipps
and Ansonia Board of Police Commissioners,
Respondents January 11, 1995
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on October 27, 1994, at which time the complainants and the respondents appeared and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint. This matter was consolidated for hearing with contested case docket number FIC 94-101.
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 filed with this Commission on March 31, 1994, the complainants alleged that the respondents violated the provisions of the FOI Act by conducting an improper executive session on March 24, 1994.
3. It is found that on March 24, 1994, the respondent police commissioners held a disciplinary hearing against two police officers, and at that hearing, the respondent commissioners entered executive session to discuss motions to disqualify two commissioners from hearing the case against the two officers.
4. It is found that in executive session, the respondent police commissioners discussed the procedural aspects of a potential disqualification, i.e., that there would not be a full commission to hear the cases if the motions to disqualify were granted.
5. It is also found that the procedural discussion of whether the motions should be granted included an analysis of the repercussions of having only three police commissioners present for the disciplinary hearing.
Docket #FIC 94-102 Page 2
6. It is also found that at the time of the executive session at issue, the respondent police commissioners were not parties to any pending claim or litigation under discussion at that time due to their conduct as members of the agency, and neither was the police commission as a whole.
7. It is concluded that the executive session at issue was not permitted pursuant to the provisions of 1-18a(e) and 1-21g(b), G.S.
8. It is concluded that the respondent police commissioners violated the provisions of 1-18a(e) and 1-21g(b), G.S., under the facts of this case.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint.
1. Henceforth the resondent police commission and its members shall strictly comply with the provisions of 1-18a(e) and 1-21g(b), G.S.
2. In its discretion the Commission declines to impose civil penalties upon the respondents as requested by the complainants.
3. With respect to the respondent police chief, the case is hereby dismissed.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of January 11, 1995.
Debra L. Rembowski
Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC 94-102 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:
CHRISTOPHER HOFFMAN AND NEW HAVEN REGISTER
Ansonia Bureau
Box 277
Ansonia, CT 06401
JAMES J. McGRATH, CHIEF OF POLICE, ANSONIA POLICE DEPARTMENT AND EUGENE K. BARON, HOWARD F. TINNEY, SR., BRIAN PHIPPS AND ANSONIA BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS
c/o James E. Sheehy, Esq.
Ansonia Corporation Counsel
303 Wakelee Avenue
Ansonia, CT 06401
Debra L. Rembowski
Clerk of the Commission