FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by FINAL
DECISION
Marcel Dufresne and The Day,
Complainants
against Docket
#FIC 88-24
Regional Director of Region
6, Seaside Center, State of Connecticut Department of Mental Retardation, and
State of Connecticut Department of Mental Retardation,
Respondents July
13, 1988
The above-captioned matter was scheduled as a contested
case for March 15, 1988, at which time the following persons requested and were
granted party status pursuant to P.A. 87-285:
Julie Kelley, John S. Matarazzo, Michael Ashford, Vivian Royster,
Carradine McAlpine and Earl Joseph Peters. On March 15, 1988, the parties
appeared and presented evidence and argument.
The hearing was continued to March 31, 1988, at which time the parties
presented a Vaughn index, testimonial evidence, and argument on the complaint.
After consideration of the entire record, the following
facts are found:
1. The
respondents are public agencies within the meaning of §1-18a(a), G.S.
2. By letter
dated December 16, 1987, the complainants requested reports related to an
investigation by the respondent department into allegations of abuse at Seaside
Regional Center.
3. Access to
the report was denied December 23, 1987 by the respondent regional director.
4. On
January 21, 1988, the complainants mailed their complaint to the Commission
alleging failure of the respondents to provide a copy of a public record.
5. The specific
report to which the complainants were denied access is a report of
investigation of allegations of abuse to clients in Unit 201 as described in an
anonymous letter to the Office of Protection and Advocacy dated November 1,
1987.
Docket #FIC 88-24 page
two
6. After the
request of the complainants was denied,
pursuant to P.A. 87-285,
Earl Joseph Peters, Michael Ashford and John Campion filed objections to
disclosure of the report on the ground that disclosure would constitute an
invasion of personal privacy.
7. The
respondents claimed the report was exempt under §§1-19(b)(2) and 1-19(b)(4),
G.S.
8. It is
found that the report sets forth the allegations in the letter of complaint,
the methodology of the investigation,
factual findings, general conclusions and recommendations for institutional
changes.
9. It is
found that the report does not identify clients by name.
10. It is
found that the report contains medical information concerning clients and other
information concerning clients which would be identifying information only for
staff and relatives familiar with the particular activities and problems of
specific clients.
11. It is
found that the report contains information concerning the job performance of
various staff members.
12. It is found
that, as a result of the conclusions of the report, staff changes occurred
including dismissal of one staff member and voluntary demotion of another.
13. It is
found that the report contains information concerning a staff member who has
appealed disciplinary action taken against him by the respondents.
14. It is
concluded that no portion of the report is exempt under §1-19(b)(4), G.S.,
because its contents do not pertain to strategy and negotiations with respect
to pending claims and litigation to which the respondents are a party.
15. It is
found that the report contains medical information with respect to one staff
member.
16. It is
found that the respondents failed to prove that the medical information did not
relate to the job performance of the employee.
17. It is found that there is a great and substantial
public interest in the care of mentally retarded people at state institutions.
18. It is concluded that the respondents failed to prove
that the report is exempt from disclosure under §1-19(b)(2), G.S.
Docket #FIC 88-24 page
three
The following order by the Commission is hereby
recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned
complaint:
1. The
respondents shall provide the complainants with the report described at
paragraph 5 herein within 30 days of the mailing of the final decision in this
case.
Approved by order of the Freedom of Information
Commission at its special meeting of July 13, 1988.
Catherine
H. Lynch
Acting
Clerk of the Commission