FREEDOM OF
INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF
CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of
a Complaint by FINAL
DECISION
Carmine
Fragione,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 89-264
Director, State
of Connecticut, Office of Adult Probation,
Respondent February 14, 1990
The above-captioned matter was heard
as a contested case on January 2, 1990, at which time the complainant 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 and conclusions of law are reached:
1.
The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a),
G.S., only in respect to its administrative functions as it is found to
constitute an office within the judicial department pursuant to 54-103a,
G.S.
2.
By letter dated June 13, 1989, the complainant requested a copy of the
audit report resulting from the February 2, 1989 audit of the Bristol office of
the respondent as well as all related memoranda and letters, documents and
reports.
3.
By letter dated June 23, 1989, the respondent denied this request.
4.
By letter filed with this Commission on June 28, 1989, the complainant
appealed this denial.
5.
The Commission takes administrative notice of its final decision in
contested case docket #FIC 89-48 and declines to reexamine the issues addressed
therein.
6.
It is found that although the respondent has no objection to providing
the complainant with a copy of the final audit report in issue, the respondent
has refrained from disclosing the record until ordered to so disclose by this
Commission because of objections by some of its employees not parties to this
case.
Docket #FIC
89-264 Page 2
7.
It is found that the audit report in issue is not a record contained in
any of its employees' personnel or medical files and similar files.
8.
It is found that the audit report in issue does not contain any personal
medical information, personal financial information, references to religious
affiliation, information concerning one's children, spouses or family
situation, or any other information unrelated to an employees performance or
qualifications as a public employee.
9.
It is concluded that 1-20a(b) and 1-20a(c), G.S. are not
applicable to the audit report in issue and accordingly offer the respondent no
opportunity to withhold its disclosure.
10.
It is concluded that the respondent violated 1-19(a), G.S. by
failing to provide the complainant with a copy of the final audit report
described in paragraph 2, above.
The following order of the
Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the
above-captioned complaint:
1.
The respondent forthwith shall provide the complainant with a copy of
the final audit report described in paragraph 2, above.
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
89-264 Page 3
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:
CARMINE FRAGIONE
24 Filley Street
Bloomfield, CT
06002
DIRECTOR, STATE
OF CONNECTICUT, OFFICE OF ADULT PROBATION
c/o Martin R.
Libbin, Esquire
Counsel, Legal
Services
231 Capitol
Avenue
Hartford, CT
06106
Tina C.
Frappier
Acting Clerk of the Commission