I got three victories today in the mail (preliminary hearing officer reports that will need finalization by full commission).
First two record cases are similar. Asked for records, including internet browser histories, that they did not provide or provided with redactions. Filed against 1 case: Ayala and Hartley & 2nd: Guglielmo and Witkos
The attorney general said that the act does not apply to legislators .... that was found to be a lie
The AG said the records (emails to leg. from citizens) are exempt ...... that was found to be a lie
The AG said the the addresses of people who contacted them are exempt....that was found to be a lie
The AG said that they had no internet browser histories ............................ that was found to be a lie
So they'll have to look for their browser histories .... as they existed when I filed the request (lol)
The third record case was to the IT director for the legislature looking for records noting meetings; this one was completely ignored after the exe. director of OLM, James Tracy, saw what records were produced, so he said "no records for you". Some of the records I asked for ... all emails from the dates 20 DEC 12 through 8 MAR13 ... for 26 legislators and the governor. The commission ruled to give me the records.
With the open meeting violation the state's only argument was that the legislature is exempt from the FOIA Act in respect to open meetings .. they lost this argument. In respect to secret meetings that were part of numerous secret meetings that produced SB 1160/PA13-3 I argued that the legislators violated the act by not noticing these meetings, not allowing the public into the meetings, not producing minutes. The hearing officer only ruled on one of the three issues: notices ~ and that the general assembly is not subject to any notice provisions of the Act.
No ruling on the secret nature of the meetings and no minutes produced (required by not only the Act but CGS Sec. 2-23 also). So the commission is currently not ruling on the secrecy of the meetings that the public was not allowed to observe in violation of the Act. These cases involved 4 or 5 meetings that I discovered through a FOIA request back in Feb 13.
But this month I spoke with various aides and got the calendars of Arsimowicz and Sharkey and found over 150 meetings that were secret. I filed 2 complaints that cover all 150 meetings. So I know that most of these meetings were held behind closed doors (the calendars give the meeting place...usually their offices which one does not have access to). So additional meetings will be addressed through these complaints...and I asked for sanctions so this will make all the legislators as parties to the cases and would make them available for examination.