FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by FINAL
DECISION
Carrie W. Gordon and Success
Programs,
Complainants
against Docket
#FIC 88‑253
Danbury Superintendent of
Schools,
Respondent October
12, 1988
The above‑captioned matter was heard as a contested
case on August 17, 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. By letter
dated May 26, 1988 the complainants made a request of the respondent for a list
of parents of tenth and eleventh grade students in the respondent's school
system.
3. The
respondent failed to provide the requested records.
4. By letter
of complaint filed with the Commission on June 27, 1988 the complainants
appealed the respondent's failure to provide the requested records.
5. At
hearing, the complainants clarified their request by stating that they were
seeking the names and addresses of parents of tenth and eleventh grade
students.
6. Also at
hearing the complainants stipulated that they were not seeking the names or
addresses of parents of handicapped or special education students.
7. It is
found that information maintained by the Danbury school system includes each
student's name and home address, the name of the parent or guardian with whom
each student lives, and the names and occupations of the parents or guardian.
Docket #FIC 88‑253 Page
Two
8. It is
further found that the records maintained by the Danbury school system, with
the exception of those maintained by the special education department, do not
specifically identify parents' addresses.
Mailings from the school system are sent "to the parents of,"
followed by each student's name and address.
9. It is
concluded that the respondent does not maintain a list such as was requested by
the complainants.
10. It is
further concluded that the respondent did not violate §§1‑15 or 1‑19(a),
G.S. when he failed to provide the complainants with a list of the names and
addresses of parents of tenth and eleventh grade students.
11. Based on
the above conclusion, the Commission does not need to address other claims of
the respondent regarding the disclosability of the information requested.
The following order by the Commission is hereby
recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above‑captioned
complaint.
1. The
complaint is hereby dismissed.
Approved by order of the Freedom of Information
Commission at its special meeting of October 12, 1988.
Catherine
H. Lynch
Acting
Clerk of the Commission