| TO: | Freedom of Information Commission |
| FROM: | Thomas A. Hennick |
| RE: | Minutes of the Commission’s regular meeting of May 23, 2012 |
A regular meeting of the Freedom of Information Commission was held on May 23, 2012, in the Freedom of Information Hearing Room, 18-20 Trinity Street, Hartford, Connecticut. The meeting convened at 2:10 p.m. with the following Commissioners present:
Commissioner Norma E. Riess, presiding
Commissioner Sherman D. London
Commissioner Owen P. Eagan
Commissioner Amy J. LiVolsi
Commissioner Matthew Streeter
Commissioner Sherman D. London
Commissioner Owen P. Eagan
Commissioner Amy J. LiVolsi
Commissioner Matthew Streeter
Also present were staff members, Colleen M. Murphy, Mary E. Schwind, Victor R. Perpetua, Tracie C. Brown, Kathleen K. Ross, Gregory F. Daniels, Lisa F. Siegel, Valicia D. Harmon, Paula S. Pearlman, Cindy Cannata and Thomas A. Hennick.
Those in attendance were informed that the Commission does not ordinarily record the remarks made at its meetings, but will do so on request.
The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the minutes of the Commission’s regular meeting of May 9, 2012.
|
Thomas Marra v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection; and State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection |
Thomas Marra participated via speakerphone. The Commissioners unanimously voted to amend the Hearing Officer’s Report. The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report as amended.* The proceedings were recorded digitally.
|
Reggie Gonsalves v. Chief, Police Department, City of Bristol; and Police Department, City of Bristol |
Reggie Gonsalves participated via speakerphone. Attorney Richard Lacey appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report. The proceedings were recorded digitally.
|
Corey Turner v. Chairman, State of Connecticut, Office of Governmental Accountability, Judicial Selection Commission; and State of Connecticut, Office of Governmental Accountability, Judicial Selection Commission |
Corey Turner participated via speakerphone. Assistant Attorney General Philip Miller appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report. The proceedings were recorded digitally.
|
Sheila Parizo v. Board of Aldermen, City of Derby |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Mark Weber Esq. v. President, Sherman Library Association; and Sherman Library Association, Town of Sherman |
Attorney Priya Morganstern appeared on behalf of the respondent library association. The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report. The proceedings were recorded digitally.
|
Herbert Mitchell v. Human Services Administrator, State of Connecticut, Department of Veterans' Affairs; and State of Connecticut, Department of Veterans' Affairs |
Herbert Mitchell appeared on his own behalf. The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report. The proceedings were recorded digitally.
|
Anthony Lazzari v. Legal Affairs Unit, State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection; and State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Sally Roberts v. Jeffry W. Cossette, Chief, Police Department, City of Meriden; and Police Department, City of Meriden |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Don Stacom and the Hartford Courant v. Personnel Director, City of New Britain; and City of New Britain |
Don Stacom appeared on behalf of the complainants. Attorney Joseph Skelly appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Suzanne Carlson and the Manchester Journal Inquirer v. Town Administrator, Town of Vernon; and Town of Vernon |
Suzanne Carlson appeared on behalf of the complainants. Attorney Martin Burke appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Suzanne Carlson and the Manchester Journal Inquirer v. Town Administrator, Town of Vernon; and Town of Vernon |
Suzanne Carlson appeared on behalf of the complainants. Attorney Martin Burke appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners unanimously voted to amend the Hearing Officer’s Report. The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report as amended.* The proceedings were recorded digitally.
|
Suzanne Carlson and the Journal Inquirer v. Mayor, Town of Vernon; and Town of Vernon |
Suzanne Carlson appeared on behalf of the complainants. Attorney Martin Burke appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
The Commissioners unanimously voted to grant a motion for a stay dated May 8, 2012, filed by Mark Dumas in Docket #FIC 2011-335, Ann DeMatteo and the New Haven Register v. Town Attorney, Town of Hamden; and Town of Hamden until such time as the Superior Court rules on a motion to stay should the matter be appealed.
Victor R. Perpetua reported on pending appeals.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:42 p.m.
________________
Thomas A. Hennick
*SEE ATTACHED FOR AMENDMENTS
MINREGmeeting 05232012/tah/05242012
MINREGmeeting 05232012/tah/05242012
AMENDMENTS
|
Thomas Marra v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection; and State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection |
The Hearing Officer’s Report is amended as follows:
[ 1. Notwithstanding the issuance of this report on May 2, 2002, a hearing is scheduled for May 30, 2002 to monitor the respondents’ progress in reviewing the documents requested by the complainant before their ultimate release to him.]
The footnote on Page 1 is removed.
|
Suzanne Carlson and the Manchester Journal Inquirer v. Town Administrator, Town of Vernon; and Town of Vernon |
The Hearing Officer’s Report is amended as follows:
14. NEVERTHELESS, B[B]ased upon the facts and circumstances of this case, it is found that the respondents’ PROVISION OF THE REQUESTED RECORDS, [responded to the requests], described in paragraphs 2 and 3, above, TWO WEEKS AFTER THE INITIAL REQUEST, WAS NOT PROMPT, [promptly] WITHIN THE MEANING OF §§1-210(A) AND 1-212(a). G.S.
15. It is therefore concluded that the respondents [did not violate] VIOLATED the promptness provisions of §§1-210(a) [or] AND 1-212(a), G.S.
The order in the Hearing Officer’s Report is amended as follows:
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.] HENCEFORTH, THE RESPONDENTS SHALL STRICTLY COMPLY WITH THE PROMPTNESS PROVISIONS OF §§1-210(a), AND 1-212(a), G.S.