Freedom
of Information Commission
of
the State of Connecticut
In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL
DECISION
Michael Selvaggi,
Complainant
against Docket
#FIC 1996-114
Board of Aldermen, City of Milford,
Respondent November
13, 1996
The
above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 13, 1996, 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 dated April 3, postmarked April 4, and filed April 8, 1996,
the complainant appealed to the Commission alleging that the respondent
violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act by:
a) meeting on March 7, 1996
without notice to the public;
b) denying the public the
right to attend the meeting;
c) meeting in executive session for an improper
purpose and without
stating the reason for such executive session;
d) imposing conditions precedent to public
attendance at a portion of the
meeting;
e) failing to prepare
minutes of the meeting or a record of votes taken; and
f) failing to enter the meeting upon the Chairman’s
Journal of Meetings as
required
by the Milford Code, Art. III, § 9.
The
complainant also requested the imposition of civil penalties against the
respondent.
3.
The respondent contends that the appeal should be dismissed for lack of
subject matter jurisdiction because the complainant is not “aggrieved.”
4.
It is concluded that aggrievement is not a jurisdictional prerequisite
to filing an appeal with the Commission, and accordingly, the Commission has
jurisdiction to entertain this appeal.
5.
With respect to the allegation contained in paragraph 2f), above, it is
found that the complainant has failed to allege a violation of the FOI Act, and
consequently, the Commission lacks jurisdiction over that allegation.
6.
It is found that on March 7, 1996, at the request of the minority party
aldermen, two auditors who had prepared the City of Milford’s (hereinafter “the
city”) independent audit report met with six aldermen to answer their questions
about the audit report and explain certain terminology utilized in the report.
7.
It is found that although it was not noticed as a meeting and no agenda
was available, several members of the public learned of the intended gathering
described in paragraph 6, above, and went to city hall on March 7, 1996 to
attend the gathering.
8.
It is found that the Chairman of the respondent denied the complainant
and other members of the public and press access to attend the gathering.
9.
It is further found that approximately twenty-five minutes into the
closed session, one of the aldermen arrived late, threw the locked door open
and invited the public inside; a consensus was then taken of the members of the
respondent who were present, and the public was permitted to attend the balance
of the gathering.
10. It is
found that no minutes were created of the March 7, 1996 gathering described in
paragraph 6, above.
11.
The respondent maintains that the gathering at issue was not a “meeting”
for purposes of the FOI Act because: a
quorum of the respondent was not present; the meeting was neither expressly nor
impliedly authorized by the full membership of the respondent; and nothing over
which the respondent has supervision, control, jurisdiction or advisory power
was discussed.
12.
Section 1-18a(b), G.S., provides, in pertinent part:
“’Meeting’ means 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
… to discuss or act upon a matter over which the public agency has supervision,
control, jurisdiction or advisory power.”
13.
It is found that the respondent is a fifteen member board and that eight
members constitute a quorum of the respondent.
14.
It is found that the six members of the respondent present at the March
7, 1996 gathering did not constitute a quorum of the respondent, and were not
authorized to conduct any business on behalf of the respondent.
15. It is found that although the
full membership of the respondent was aware of the gathering, the six aldermen
who attended did so voluntarily and not at the suggestion or direction of the
respondent.
16. It is
also found that no statutory or charter provision required the respondent to
conduct an educational workshop on auditing terminology and concepts.
17.
It is therefore concluded that the gathering described in paragraph 6,
above, was neither a convening or assembly of a quorum of a public agency, nor
was it a hearing or other proceeding of the respondent, within the meaning of §1-18a(b), G.S.
18.
Consequently, it is concluded that under the facts of this case, the
gathering described in paragraph 6, above, was not a “meeting” under §1-18a(b), G.S., and
therefore was not subject to the requirements of §1-21(a), G.S.
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.
Although the respondent was not bound by the open meeting provisions of
the FOI Act, given the apparently educational purpose of the gathering in
question, the Commission believes there was no reason to have excluded the
complainant and other members of the public from attending the session in
question from the outset.
Approved
by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of
November 13, 1996.
__________________________
Elizabeth
A. Leifert
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:
Michael
Selvaggi
574
Milford Point Road
Milford,
CT 06460
Board of Aldermen, City of Milford
c/o Marilyn J. Lipton, Esq.
City
Hall
110
River Street
Milford,
CT 06460
__________________________
Elizabeth
A. Leifert
Acting
Clerk of the Commission
FIC 1996-114/FD/eal/112296