FREEDOM OF
INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF
CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of
a Complaint by FINAL
DECISION
Michael and
Patricia Mabry,
Complainants
against Docket #FIC 89-404
Administrator,
Town of Litchfield Tornado Clean-up Project,
Respondent April 11, 1990
The above-captioned matter was
heard as a contested case on March 5, 1990, 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 and conclusions of law are
reached:
1. The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of
1-18a(a), G.S.
2. On October 16, 1989, the complainants made a written request for
access to all records the respondent possesses as administrator of the tornado
clean-up program under the Federal Emergency Management Agency
("FEMA") and other clean-up program guidelines.
3. When the complainants did not receive a response to their letter
after four business days, they filed an appeal with this Commission on October
30, 1989 alleging denial of their request to inspect the public records in the
respondent's care.
4. It is found that some of the relevant records were kept in the
first selectman's office and some in the public works office at the town hall.
5. It is also found that the town's tornado clean-up project
administrator kept at his home some forms signed by citizens who requested
clean-up work on their property which forms released the town from legal liability
for work done on their property.
6. It is found that the town's tornado clean-up project
administrator reports to the first selectman.
7. It is found that after having received the request identified in
paragraph 2, above, the first selectman telephoned
Docket #FIC
89-404 Page
2
FEMA in Boston
as well as her attorney to request their approval to allow the complainants
access to all documents related to the request identified in paragraph 2,
above.
8. The respondent claims that the first selectman's efforts to seek
FEMA's approval to grant access caused her to delay the complainants' access to
the pertinent records available at town hall.
9. It is concluded that the respondent's claim identified in paragraph
8, above, fails to state an exemption under the FOI Act from the requirement of
prompt access pursuant to 1-19(a), G.S.
10. The respondent also claims that it was the responsibility of the
complainants to specify in greater detail those records they sought, including
a direct reference to the releases sought and identified in paragraph 5, above.
11. It is concluded that under the circumstances of this case the
complainants' request identified in paragraph 2, above, sufficiently identifies
the records sought and reasonably includes the release forms identified in
paragraph 5, above.
12. It is found that at the time of the hearing into this matter, the
complainants had not yet been granted access to the documents identified in
paragraph 5, above.
13. It is concluded that the delay identified in paragraph 12, above,
constitutes a violation of 1-19(a), G.S.
The following order by the
Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the
above-captioned complaint:
1. The respondent shall disclose to the complainants all records
identified in paragraphs 2, 4, and 5, above to the extent that he has not done
so at the time of the adoption of the Final Decision in this matter.
2. The Commission wishes to remind the respondent that no public
records are to be filed or stored at private residences but are to be kept on
file at the regular office or business place of the agency or, if none exists,
then in the office of the town clerk.
Approved by
order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of April
11, 1990.
Tina
C. Frappier
Acting
Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC
89-404 Page
2
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:
MICHAEL AND
PATRICIA MABRY
182 Cathole Road
Litchfield, CT
06759
ADMINISTRATOR, TOWN
OF LITCHFIELD TORNADO CLEAN-UP PROJECT
c/o Kent Gilyard
Town Office
Building
West Street
Litchfield, CT
06759
Tina
C. Frappier
Acting
Clerk of the Commission