Monday, December 15, 2008

Mr. Anonymous Talks About FOI Law

Let's look at a couple of pertinent sections of the FOI law that Pat wants to ignore..........If the commission finds that a person has taken an appeal under this subsection frivolously, without reasonable grounds and solely for the purpose of harassing the agency from which the appeal has been taken, after such person has been given an opportunity to be heard at a hearing conducted in accordance with sections 4-176e to 4-184, inclusive, the commission may, in its discretion, impose against that person a civil penalty of not less than twenty dollars nor more than one thousand dollars. The commission shall notify a person of a penalty levied against him pursuant to this subsection by written notice sent by certified or registered mail. If a person fails to pay the penalty within thirty days of receiving such notice, the superior court for the judicial district of Hartford shall, on application of the commission, issue an order requiring the person to pay the penalty imposed. Interesting food for thought. 


And here's another area that Pat doesn't talk about on "The Pit": Sec. 1-214a. Disclosure of public agency termination, suspension or separation agreement containing confidentiality provision. Any agreement entered into by any public agency, as defined in section 1-200, with an employee or personal services contractor providing for the termination, suspension or separation from employment of such employee or the termination or suspension of the provision of personal services by such contractor, as the case may be, that contains a confidentiality provision that prohibits or restricts such public agency from disclosing the existence of the agreement or the cause or causes for such termination, suspension or separation including, but not limited to, alleged or substantiated sexual abuse, sexual harassment, sexual exploitation or sexual assault by such employee or contractor, shall be subject to public disclosure under this chapter. (P.A. 06-132, §1.) Someone ought to look at requesting a certain former State of CT. Librarian and why he suddenly "retired".


Here's another section Pat doesn't want to read: Sec. 1-241. (Formerly Sec. 1-211). Injunctive relief from frivolous, unreasonable or harassing freedom of information appeals. A public agency, as defined in subdivision (1) of section 1-200, may bring an action to the Superior Court against any person who was denied leave by the Freedom of Information Commission to have his appeal heard by the commission under subsection (b) of section 1-206 because the commission determined and found that such appeal or the underlying request would perpetrate an injustice or would constitute an abuse of the commission’s administrative process. The action authorized under this section shall be limited to an injunction prohibiting such person from bringing any further appeal to the commission which would perpetrate an injustice or would constitute an abuse of the commission’s administrative process. If, after such an injunction is ordered, the person subject to the injunction brings a further appeal to the Freedom of Information Commission and the commission determines that such appeal would perpetrate an injustice or would constitute an abuse of the commission’s administrative process, such person shall be conclusively deemed to have violated the injunction and such agency may seek further injunctive and equitable relief, damages, attorney’s fees and costs, as the court may order. (P.A. 93-191, §2; P.A. 97-47, §14.)

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

One thing we know. The Republican-American will never investigate this ongoing harassment of the MVFD and Gormley by Pattie.

Maybe Marj Needham can find someone in Middlebury to grow a pair of balls and actively investigate scumbag Deangelis. I'm thinking that a spotlight focused tightly on Pattie's harassment of the MVFD and Gormley will do the trick. We want to show the evil without giving the evil a bigger soapbox.

My dream would be for a huge lawsuit hitting Pattie and putting him out on the street and into a homeless shelter where he belongs.

Anonymous said...

I wonder where a disabled pensioner is getting the money for a FOI lawyer? ( this is the same clown who claimed he couldn't afford Christmas presents for his grand-kids because of his sky high taxes...)

Anonymous said...

He looks like he belongs in a homeless shelter as well as his bike

Anonymous said...

It is the duty of the MVFD to stand up to this jerk with a lawsuit. The words and tone of his blog are evidence against him. The words on this blog are evidence that we are being harassed and our energies and treasury are being wasted by that harassment.

He is costing the MVFD money. That money is being wasted on his harassment. Sounds like a lawsuit to me - and the law is on our side.