FREEDOM OF
INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF
CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of
a Complaint by Final
Decision
Fayne E.
Erickson,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 94-379
Chairperson,
Naugatuck Board of Education,
Respondent June 28, 1995
The above-captioned matter was
heard as a contested case on May 25, 1995, at which time the complainant and
the respondent 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 respondent is a public agency within the meaning of
1-18a(a), G.S.
2. By letter filed with the Commission on October 25, 1994, the
complainant alleged that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information
("FOI") Act by contacting "many Naugatuck burgesses" by
phone regarding a vote that was to occur at an upcoming meeting and by not
publishing any minutes of those calls.
3. It is found that on or about October 10, 1994, at a joint meeting
of the Naugatuck Board of Mayor and Burgesses and the Naugatuck Board of
Finance, the Naugatuck Board of Burgesses (hereinafter "board of burgesses")
voted to deny a motion to consult an expert on year-round education.
4. The complainant maintains that following the meeting referred to
in paragraph 3 above, one of the burgesses indicated to her that his vote was
based on information provided to him by the respondent over the telephone
earlier that week.
5. It is found that the respondent contacted at least three, and
perhaps as many as five, members of the nine member board of burgesses by phone
earlier that week regarding the subject of the upcoming vote.
Docket #FIC
94-379 Page
2
6. At the hearing on this matter, the complainant alleged that:
a) the respondent's phone calls
amounted to private decision making by public officials, and that she should
have conducted her discussions in public; and
b) if the respondent contacted a
quorum of the board of burgesses, such communications would constitute a
meeting of the board of burgesses under the FOI Act.
7. With respect to the complainant's claim concerning the
respondent, it is found that in making the complained of calls to certain
burgesses, the respondent was acting alone and not at the direction of the
Naugatuck Board of Education (hereinafter "board of education").
8. It is further found that no members of the board of education
serve on the board of burgesses, and that the item voted on by the board of
burgesses is not an item upon which the board of education would vote.
9. It is concluded that the respondent's actions in making telephone
calls to several burgesses regarding an upcoming item before the board of
burgesses did not constitute a meeting of the respondent within the meaning of
1-18a(b), G.S.
10. It is therefore concluded that the respondent did not violate the
provisions of the FOI Act by failing to publish minutes of her telephone
conversations with certain burgesses.
11. With respect to the complainant's claim concerning the board of
burgesses, it is concluded that this Commission lacks jurisdiction to determine
whether a meeting of the board of burgesses occurred during the week prior to
its October 10, 1994 meeting, as the board of burgesses is not a party in this
matter.
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 Commission notes that at the hearing on this matter, both
parties expressed some confusion as to what constitutes a meeting under the FOI
Act. The parties are encouraged to
contact members of the Commission's staff, who are available to assist the
public with questions concerning the application of the FOI Act.
Docket #FIC
94-379 Page
3
Approved by
Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of June
28, 1995.
Elizabeth
A. Leifert
Acting
Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC
94-379 Page
4
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:
Ms. Fayne E.
Erickson
35 Brighton Road
Naugatuck, CT
06770
Chairperson,
Naugatuck Board of Education
Ms. Rebecca
Zandvliet
380 Church
Street
Naugatuck, CT
06770
Elizabeth
A. Leifert
Acting
Clerk of the Commission