FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION

Robert M. DeCrescenzo,

Complainant

against Docket #FIC 89-104

Department of Children and Youth Services,

Respondent February 14, 1990

The above-captioned matter was heard with #FIC 89-105 Decrescenzo v. Acting Attorney General because of the similarity of the cases. The matters were heard as contested cases August 18, 1989 and September 8, 1989, at which time the complainant and the respondent appeared 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 complaint filed March 22, 1989, the complainant alleged that the respondent failed to provide him with copies of records requested March 3, 1989.

3. It is found that the complainant seeks the following records:

(a) copies of records concerning Adoption Services of Connecticut;

(b) any and all correspondence between Jake Terpstra and/or the federal department of health and human services and Dale Maynard or any other official of the respondent;

(c) all notes and records relating to the meeting held on or about September 6, 1988 between Kenneth P. Keller and Dale Maynard or any other officials or employees of the respondent;

(d) all materials forwarded to Art Webster, Assistant Attorney General, from Kenneth P. Keller regarding Easter House and/or Seymour Kurtz;

(e) all drafts of any letter to Easter House and all handwritten notes referred to in the interdepartmental message of July 27, 1988 from Pamella A. Nelson to Art Webster;

Docket #FIC 89-104 page 2

(f) all additional information referred to in letters of August 18, 1988 and August 29, 1988, from Pamela A. Nelson to Art Webster dated August 18, 1988;

(g) records concerning Family Life Center;

(h) records concerning L.D.S. Social Services;

(i) all notes and/or minutes relating to or produced at the meeting held June 24, 1988 with Laurie Adler, Assistant Attorney General.

4. It is found that the respondent provided the complainant with copies of records it had regarding items 3(a), 3(g) and 3(h).

5. The respondent alleged that the records it had not provided were exempt pursuant to 1-19(b)(4) and 1-19(b)(10); because 1-15, G.S., does not require the respondent to do research or answer questions, and because the requested records had been provided to the complainant on or about March 1, 1989 in response to an earlier request.

6. It is found that, on February 9, 1989, the complainant requested copies from the respondent of her records concerning Easter House, Adoption World, and Friends of Children.

7. It is found that on or about March 1, 1989, the complainant received copies of 1,587 pages of records in response to his February 9, 1989 request.

8. It is found that the complainant and other members of the complainant's law firm, Updike, Kelly and Spellacy, P.C., represent Easter House, Friends of Children, Inc. and Seymour Kurtz, the chief executive officer of Easter House and Friends of Children.

9. It is found that the activities of Easter House were investigated by the respondent during 1988.

10. It is found that, on February 7, 1989, Assistant Attorney General Susan Pearlman sent a letter on behalf of the respondent to Seymour Kurtz. In the letter she stated that, until Easter House is licensed by the respondent, Easter House may not place Connecticut children in foster homes or in adoption.

11. It is found that, on or about March 20, 1989, Easter House filed an administrative appeal of the alleged administrative action contained in the letter of Assistant Attorney General Pearlman dated February 7, 1989.

Docket #FIC 89-104 page 3

12. It is found that on or about March 23, 1989, Friends of Children, Inc., through the complainant, instituted a mandamus action with respect to its applications for approval as a Connecticut child placement agency.

13. It is found that the respondent has provided the complainant with items d, g, and h, which are set forth at paragraph 3, above.

14. It is found that the respondent does not have some of the records requested by the complainant in his March 3, 1989 request.

15. It is found that, except for the records which it does not have, the respondent failed to prove any of the records withheld herein are exempt from disclosure.

16. It is found that most of the records provided the complainant by the respondent on March 1, 1989, are the same records sought by the complainant but not provided by the respondent with respect to the March 3, 1989 request.

17. It is found, that under the facts of this case where most of the requested records have been disclosed, where some do not exist, and where the complainant is using 1-15, G.S., for purposes of discovery on behalf of his clients, that it is not appropriate to require the respondent to comply with the request for disclosure.

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 regular meeting of February 14, 1990.

Tina C. Frappier

Acting Clerk of the Commission

Docket #FIC 89-104 page 4

PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.

THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:

ROBERT M. DECRESCENZO

Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C.

P.O. Box 31277

One State Street

Hartford, CT 06103

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND YOUTH SERVICES

c/o Benjamin Zivyon, Esquire

Assistant Attorney General

MacKenzie Hall

110 Sherman Street

Hartford, CT 06105

Tina C. Frappier

Acting Clerk of the Commission