FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        FINAL DECISION

 

Gary D. LeBeau,

 

                        Complainant

 

            against              Docket #FIC 90-139

 

Mayor of East Hartford,

 

                        Respondent                  October 10, 1990

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 6, 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.

 

            2.  By letter dated April 4, 1990, the complainant requested the following of the respondent: copies of the resumes for all directors she has employed since she began her tenure as mayor; and, access to the resumes of other applicants for those positions, as well as to copies of postings or advertisements that were made to let the public know the positions were available.

 

            3.  By letter filed with this Commission on April 23, 1990, the complainant alleged non-compliance with his request.

 

            4.  Prior to hearing, the respondent provided the complainant with the resumes of the directors the respondent employed since her tenure as mayor began; therefore, the complainant withdrew that portion of his complaint.

 

            5.  The complainant also withdrew that portion of his complaint seeking access to copies of postings or advertisements made to let the public know the positions were available.

 

            6.  Accordingly, at hearing the complainant sought only those portions of the resumes of individuals who unsuccessfully applied for positions as directors that would not reveal their personal identities.

 

Docket #FIC 90-139                           Page 2

 

            7.  It is found that the resumes submitted by the applicants in question are personnel or similar files within the meaning of 1-19(b)(2), G.S.

 

            8.  The respondent claims that it would be difficult to lure candidates for positions with the town if they believed that their identities would become known should their quest for the position be unsuccessful.

 

            9.  The respondent also claims that the resumes at issue are records of a personnel search committee that would reveal the identities of executive level employment candidates and therefore are exempt from disclosure pursuant to 1-19(b)(2), G.S.

 

            10.  It is found that 1-19(b)(2), G.S., provides no per se exemption for the resumes of executive level employment candidates and, therefore, this Commission need not address the issue of whether the candidacies in this case rise to the executive level.

 

            11.  Furthermore, this Commission takes administrative notice of its final decision in contested case docket #FIC 89-270.

 

            12.  It is found that, on balance, the personal privacy interests of the unsuccessful applicants in their personal identities outweighs the public interest in disclosure of their identities.

 

            13.  It is also found that the public interest in the general qualifications of the pool of applicants from which the respondent chose public employees outweighs the claimed privacy interest in those portions of the resumes submitted for public employment that do not personally identify the applicants.

 

            14.  It is concluded that the respondent's failure to provide the complainant with those portions of the submitted applicant resumes that do not disclose the personal identities of those applicants 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 provide the complainant with the records more fully described in paragraph 6 of the findings, above.

 

Docket #FIC 90-139                           Page 3

 

            2.  In complying with paragraph 1 or this order, the respondent may mask or otherwise delete the names, addresses, social security numbers and any other information that would personally identify the applicants.

 

Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of October 10, 1990.

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 90-139                           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:

GARY D. LEBEAU

Office of the Town Council

740 Main Street

East Hartford, CT 06108

 

MAYOR OF EAST HARTFORD

740 Main Street

East Hartford, CT 06108

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission