“ Brevity and specificity being our goal among other matters
please consider the following a complaint relative to my Nov 17
FOI request made of Mr. K. Michaud, Treasurer of the Middlebury
Fire Dept.
Specifically the following list points to the information never
provided to me in this or any other FOI request made to the
Middlebury Vol. Fire Dept. or of Mr. Michaud.
The following is a list the 15 items which have never been provided
to me and which form the basis of this complaint.
For the calendar years , 2005, 2006 and 2007, I wish to inspect
1. Copies of canceled checks for each person receiving fire
incentive pay for each time period mentioned above,
2.Copies of the check register showing the check # and amount
recorded for each person receiving fire incentive pay for this time
period,
3. Copy of the W3 transmittal form showing the amounts reported
to the Social Security administration for the time period quoted
above,
For July 2005 through November 2007, please provide the
following supporting documentation:
4. Number of fire calls submitted in the payment request to the
Town of Middlebury,
5. Invoice showing the total fire pay requested from the Town of
Middlebury,
6. Copies of canceled checks for each person receiving fire pay for
this time period,
7 Copies of the check register showing the check# and amount
recorded for each person receiving fire pay for this time period,
8, Copy of the W3 transmittal form showing the amounts reported
to the Social Security administration for this time period,
( For your fiscal years ending in , 2005, 2006 and 2007 please
provide the following documentation for inspection:
9. Total revenue received related to ambulance operations. This
includes, but is not limited to, donations, private and insurance
billing payments and any other ambulance revenue.
10 Any deductions for uncollectible billings,
11 Net Revenue Received
12 All expenses charged against ambulance revenue including, but
not limited to:
o Copies of all invoices paid
o Copies of all canceled checks applied against the invoices
o Copies of all canceled checks for each person receiving payment
for ambulance duty
o Copies of the check register showing check# and amount
recorded for each check payment made for ambulance expenses
13. Net Income (or Loss) from ambulance operations,
14. If there are payments made to individuals for ambulance duty,
copy of the W3 transmittal form showing the amounts reported to
the Social Security administration for this time period.
15. At the FOI Commission hearing it was noted that the Fire Dept
had sent audits of its dept to the Town ( Mr. Belden ) for the past
three years. I hereby request to inspect these audits
Thank You,
Pat de Angelis”
It seems to me the there were two occasions where the MVFD set aside full days for Mr. DeAngelis to examine any record he was entitled to see. Yet, he elected not to take advantage of first, the MVFD Treasurer taking a full day to help him, and on the second occasion the MVFD Chief taking a day off from his work to provide information as well.
In addition, Mr. DeAngelis, according to FOI law, must pay a set amount for each copy of any document he would like. The MVFD has yet to see his checkbook, because he can’t expect the taxpayer nor the MVFD to provide him such copies for free.
The above list illustrates more than anything that this appears to be no more than pure harassment of the Middlebury Volunteer Fire Department.
If Mr. DeAngelis wanted to see more information, perhaps he should have spent more time at the MVFD to examine these documents when he had the chance, instead of leaving after an hour or so.
Nothing productive will ever come out of any of this. To me it is just another deterrent for those who want to volunteer for the MVFD. That hurts this Town. The people who do the most in this community are criticized by those who do absolutely nothing. That will be their legacy. A paid fire department may be their legacy as well, if those who choose to volunteer one day say, it is just not worth it.
Posts
9 comments:
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.)
It is my prayer that someone has the wherewithal to pursue these laws and put Pattie in jail for the maximum amount under the law.
Here's a little tidbit from yesterday's FOI Commission minutes:
Docket #FIC 2008-004 Pat DeAngelis v. Chief, Fire Department, Town of Middlebury; and Fire Department, Town of Middlebury
The Commissioners took no action. The complaint was withdrawn.
A few more of these, and the first section of my first post may very well come true.
I just wish that one of our local reporters had the gumption to report on this bullsh*t. If Eddie also did a bunch of FOI's then include him in the report.
This kind of waste should make ordinary citizens mad as hell. But not if they don't know about it - and the costs of this bullsh*t.
Pattie promised to tell everything about his big FOI success. Today there is silence from the windbag.
What will he tell his kool-aid drinkers?
Time to spin, spin, spin...
Based on my interpretation of the second section (Sec. 1-241. Injunctive relief from frivolous, unreasonable or harassing freedom of information appeals.) I'd say the following:
The MVFD must bring a lawsuit against Pattie in order to protect its interests and be able to seek punitive damages if Pattie persists.
We're at a moment of truth now. Pattie can continue his harassment with impunity if not challenged, or Pattie can take a big financial risk if the MVFD calls him on this.
Personally, I think the MVFD should take that legal step now. I'd be more than happy to send them a good size donation to help the cause.
(I'm not Daily Reader. Different person)
Hey Matt!
Hey Jaimie!
Hey Marj!
Here's another story you're not reporting!
Unrelenting FOI harassment by Deangelis costs MVFD and Town time and money.
Shall I write this story for you or would you earn your pay and do it yourselves?
Sock it to 'em, people...
Post a Comment