FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION
Robert McCloud,
Complainant(s)
against Docket #FIC 90-13
The State of Connecticut Department of Correction Board of Parole,
Respondent(s) June 27, 1990
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on May 1, 1990, at which time the complainant and the respondent board 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 board is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.
2. By letter of complaint dated January 8, 1990, and filed with the Commission on January 10, 1990, the complainant alleged that the respondent board failed to comply with his January 2, 1990 request for documents, (hereinafter "request").
3. In his request to the respondent board, the complainant sought documents containing the following information as it pertained to eight inmates, (hereinafter "inmates"):
(a). records of the respondent board's parole decisions, (hereinafter "decisions"), concerning each of the inmates, including the specific dates on which the inmates appeared before the respondent board;
(b). records of the status of each of the inmates appearing before the respondent board, including the eligibility dates for each inmate and information concerning the number of appearances before the respondent board; and
(c). records pertaining to the length of time served by each inmate prior to his consideration for parole.
Docket #FIC 90-13 Page 2
4. The respondent board does not rely on any specific exemption within the Freedom of Information Act. Rather, the respondent claims that:
(a). there is no one list or document that exists which contains all of the information requested, and therefore compliance would require the respondent board to gather information and create a document; and
(b). disclosure of the information requested might result in the infliction of harm upon the complainant.
5. It is found that disclosure of the requested records would not result in the disclosure of personal information about the inmates, and therefore would not constitute an invasion of the inmates' privacy.
6. It is found that the complainant's request is limited to information pertaining to past parole board hearings of the respondent board and the treatment of specified inmates at those hearings.
7. It is found that the requested information is either maintained in files which are kept by the respondent board, or files to which the respondent board has access.
8. It is also found that although the information requested is not contained in one document or in one location, the requested records can be provided to the complainant with a minimum of difficulty to the respondent board.
9. It is further found that despite the fact that the requested information is not contained in one document or maintained in one location, the respondent board indicated its willingness to furnish the information to other members of the public upon request.
10. It is found that the complainant is personally acquainted with the inmates named in the request.
11. It is found that the complainant has no fears about his personal safety after receipt of the requested information.
12. It is concluded, therefore, that upon these facts the respondent board violated 1-15 and 1-19(a), G. S., by failing to promptly comply with the complainant's request.
Docket #FIC 90-13 Page 3
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended
on the basis of the record concerning the above captioned complaint:
1. Henceforth the respondent board shall strictly comply with the open records requirements of 1-15 and 1-19(a), G. S.
2. The respondent board shall forthwith provide the complainant with either the information requested as described in paragraphs 3(a), 3(b), and 3(c) of the findings above, or a copy of the records containing such information.
Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of June 27, 1990.
Tina C. Frappier
Acting Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC 90-13 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 MCCLOUD
159 Mayflower Street
West Hartford, CT 06110
STATE OF CONNECTICUT, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, BOARD OF PAROLE
c/o Henri Alexandre, Esquire
Assistant Attorney General
MacKenzie Hall
110 Sherman Street
Hartford, CT 06105
Tina C. Frappier
Acting Clerk of the Commission