FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by FINAL
DECISION
Patrick J. Shevlin and Local
834, IAFF,
Complainants,
against Docket
#FIC 88-91
Bridgeport Civil Service
Commission,
Respondent July
13, 1988
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case
on May 4, 1988, at which time the complainants and the respondent appeared,
stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on
the complaint.
After consideration of the entire record, the following
facts are found:
1. The respondent
is a public agency within the meaning of §1-18a(a), G.S.
2. From December
8 to 11, 1987, the respondent held a promotional examination for the position
of fire lieutenant.
3. At meetings of
the respondent on February 3, 1988, and March 10, 1988, the complainant Patrick
Shevlin orally requested access to tape recordings of the oral portion of his
examination. On behalf of the
membership of the respondent Local 834, IAFF, he also requested that each
member who took the test receive access to the tape of his own oral
examination.
4. At those same
meetings, the respondent denied the complainants' requests.
5. By letter
dated March 11, 1988, and filed with the Commission on March 15, 1988, the
complainants appealed to the Commission.
6. At the hearing
the respondent moved to dismiss the complaint.
7. It is found
that the requested tape recordings are public records within the meaning of
§§1-18a(d) and 1-19(a), G.S.
Docket #88-91 Page
Two
8. It is found
that although test questions may be exempt from disclosure under §1-19(b)(6),
G.S., the respondent already has disclosed the test questions for both the
written and oral portions of the examination in question.
9. It is found
that individuals' test answers do not fall within the §1-19(b)(6), G.S.,
exemption.
10. Thus it is
concluded that the respondent violated §§1-15 and 1-19(a), G.S., by not
providing the complainants with prompt access to the requested tape recordings.
11. It is also
found that the respondent, following its own regulations, limited the amount of
time and the number of times the complainants could review their answers and
results for the written portion of the examination.
12. It is concluded
that such regulations are void under §1-19(a), G.S., as they curtail the right
granted to every person by §1-19(a), G.S., to inspect or copy public records
during a public agency's regular business hours.
The following order by the Commission is hereby
recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned
complaint:
1. The
respondent's motion to dismiss the complaint is hereby denied.
2. The respondent
forthwith shall provide the complainants with access to the requested records.
3. The respondent
henceforth shall act in strict compliance with §§1-15 and 1-19(a), G.S.
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