Private Firehouse Meetings Put To The Test
By Julie Wernau
Published on 8/22/2007 in TheDay.com
Mystic — The Old Mystic Fire Department will soon find out whether it has been holding secret meetings in violation of Connecticut law.

On Monday, the Freedom of Information Commission will hear a case brought by former volunteer firefighter Joćo Godoy against the volunteer fire department. In his complaint to the commission, Godoy, of Avon, alleges that the department — which is largely funded by district taxes — violated Connecticut's Freedom of Information laws when it revoked his membership at a meeting that was closed to the public without posting a notice of the meeting to the public.

Fire Chief Kenneth W. Richards Jr. said Tuesday that Godoy's complaint is the first challenge to a well-established firehouse policy of members-only meetings.

“It's been the practice of the Old Mystic Fire Department for the past 170 years that they are not public meetings,” said Richards. “... They're private meetings.”

Godoy was voted in by the membership as a regular unpaid member of the fire department in October 2002 and was voted out on April 9 following two meetings of the department's board and officers to discuss “various incidents” involving Godoy.

According to Godoy's complaint, the board — acting on the advice of New London attorney Brian K. Estep — did not permit Godoy to open the meetings to the public, as would be required under the FOI Act for a public meeting; would not allow him to tape the meetings; and asked Godoy to wait downstairs while the board and officers deliberated his dismissal in his absence.

In his complaint, he cited a 1999 decision in which the FOI Commission determined that a fire district in Bloomfield was a public agency, as well as a 1986 commission decision that declared a volunteer fire department in Portland to be a public agency.

“I believe they have to comply with the Freedom of Information Act, and I'm very confident that on Monday there will be a ruling in my favor,” Godoy said Tuesday.

Godoy is asking that the three meetings regarding his dismissal be declared null and void and that the commission impose civil penalties in addition to ordering that the fire department attend an educational workshop about the FOI Act.

Richards said that, to his knowledge, no one before Godoy has ever requested information from the fire department under the FOI Act. Richards said the department has complied with Godoy's frequent requests for documents under the act.

Richards, the district president, the president of the fire department board and their attorney plan to attend the hearing Monday.

“Our department's been in existence since 1837 and we've always done it this way,” Richards said, adding that the department would comply with whatever decision the commission makes. “... Depending which way the FOI Commission rules, it could affect a lot of fire departments in the state of Connecticut.”

An informal poll of some other local volunteer departments found that members-only meetings are not out of the ordinary, though usually departments have two styles of meetings: those for the board of directors and those for company members, which are exclusive.

David Steel, chief of the Noank Fire Company, a volunteer department in Groton, said the company's board of directors meetings are open to the public, but when the company members gather, the meetings are open to firefighters only.

In Salem, the Gardner Lake Volunteer Fire Department holds company meetings that only the department's members are allowed to attend, but the company's board of directors' meetings are open to the public, according to Donald Bourdeau, a retired chief there.

The same is true for the Salem Volunteer Fire Department, which is the town's other fire company, said Chief Eugene Maiorano.

“I think most of them are the same,” Maiorano said, referring to volunteer companies in general.

While the board meetings focus on budgetary processes, he said, company meetings are usually reserved for personnel operational items.

Day Staff Writer M. Matthew Clark contributed to this report.

 

R E A D E R'S C O M M E N T S
Posted- 8/23/2007 9:01:57 AM In England, they used to hold meetings in secrecy so the King could get rid of his opponents silently. Call me a liberal, but I like my government open and clean! Edward II
Star Chambers, England
- 8/23/2007 9:24:48 AM
 

 

Posted- 8/23/2007 7:54:20 AM An Avon resident complaining about a fire department in Mystic makes as much sense as people from Groton, Norwich, and Florida worrying about some business in Mystic. Don’t you have fire departments in your ugly towns to take care of? Uncasville... Where the hell is that? Grace
Mystic, CT
- 8/23/2007 8:53:28 AM
 

 

Posted- 8/23/2007 2:46:20 AM I cannot help but wonder what about this gents background and experience disqualifies him from being a Firefighter in Old Mystic? But, the fact is that Chief Richards apparently has no confidence in him (regardless of why). Instead of milking the liberal system, this guy should suck it up & move on. The fire service is made up of "doers" not "whiners" MOVE ON! Fred
Bozrah, CT
- 8/23/2007 8:50:39 AM
 

 

Posted- 8/22/2007 3:09:11 PM At this point all I want to know is what Mr. Godoy did to get himself voted out. This could be good and he might regret making it an issue. Oh and I have trouble with people who "it's the way we've been doing it forever." That reasoning doesn't always work anymore. To many rule changes over the years so don't hang your hat on that one. I'm not saying you need to open them, just saying you might need a better defense. Mark
Uncasville, CT
- 8/22/2007 5:20:11 PM
 

 

Posted- 8/22/2007 2:12:14 PM Per Ms. Bogue's comments regarding the Reliance Company, is there a point you are attempting to make? If Reliance Co has been in existance since 1837 and then reorganized in 1937 how is that material to this issue?I question why a statement was made in this article that the OMFD has "secret" meetings. That kind of salacious statement implies that something sneaky or underhanded is taking place. If you ask any member where & when these monthly meetings are held you would be told. It would appear that the OMFD is merely keeping their meetings organized in the manner in which they always have been intended, for their membership, not the public at large. It is not a forum for disgruntled individuals to air personal vendettas. If this person is not a member (nor a District Taxpayer) he has/had no reason to be there. It appears that any requests for information of what took place during those meetings have been complied with, so what's his problem? This seems like a veiled attempt to drag this Department through the mud by someone who obviously does not respond to this area as a First Responder from Avon. GJ
Groton CT
- 8/22/2007 2:31:27 PM
 

 

Posted- 8/22/2007 11:08:33 AM Why does this guy have to volunteer in Mystic when he lives in Avon? Is it that no other department will take him. Last I heard there was a shortage of volunteers, so is he going to all this trouble over one volunteer department half way across the state from where he live? Cup Cake
- 8/22/2007 11:39:42 AM
 

 

Posted- 8/22/2007 10:14:06 AM Now why would I want to go to a meeting regarding a firefighter..one that I don't know...Why was he dismissed in the first place????...Living in Avon...Maybe he should go back there and join a Fire Department closer to his home..Or is this a personal vendetta on his part..Once a trouble maker is correct..Always a trouble maker... Linda
Groton,Ct
- 8/22/2007 10:33:47 AM
 

 

Posted- 8/22/2007 8:42:47 AM Private meetings, secret handshakes? Just because the meetings aren't open to the public does not make them "secret." The information from those meetings are accessible through FOI just as any other material is. Another frivolous lawsuit, probably one of many from the person in question. It's interesting how the meat of the story is about Old Mystic Fire Department and their "secret" meetings, and mentions nothing about WHAT these meetings were about. Why was this firefighter voted out of the department? Sour grapes on his part, for sure. Gloria Johnson
Groton, CT
- 8/22/2007 9:19:52 AM
 

 

Posted- 8/22/2007 7:08:28 AM From the way I read it. This Guy should suck it up and go back to Avon. Once a trouble maker, always a trouble maker............ Scott
Norwich, Ct
- 8/22/2007 8:30:48 AM
 

 

Posted- 8/22/2007 6:33:50 AM To my knowledge the Reliance has not had a continuous operation from 1837 It was reorganized about 1937 after being defunct for many years Charlotte Bogue
Pt orange FL 32127
- 8/22/2007 8:29:43 AM