FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        FINAL DECISION

 

Vera S. Zima,

 

                        Complainant

 

            against              Docket #FIC 90-257

 

North Haven Police Department and State's Attorney, Judicial District of New Haven,

 

                        Respondents                 November 28, 1990

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 10, 1990, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared, and presented argument on the complaint.  The case was consolidated with #FIC 90-154, Vera S. Zima v. Reports and Records Division, State of Connecticut, Department of Public Safety, Division of State Police, and #FIC 90-241, Vera S. Zima v. State's Attorney, Judicial District of New Haven; Forensic Science laboratory, State of Connecticut, Department of Public Safety, Division of State Police; and Chief of Police, Wallingford Police Department because of the similarity of their subject matters.

 

            After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:

 

            1.  The respondent police department is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

            2.         The respondent state's attorney is not a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

            3.         It is concluded that the complaint against the respondent state's attorney should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

 

            4.         By letter dated July 7, 1990 the complainant asked the respondent police department certain questions concerning Detective Joseph Depoto and case #86-04161.

 

            5.         By letter of complaint dated July 9, 1990 the complainant claimed that the respondent police department failed to respond to her request.

 

Docket #FIC 90-257                           Page Two

 

            6.It is found that there is no requirement under the  Freedom of Information Act) that a public agency must answer questions posed by a member of the public.

 

            7.         It is concluded that the respondent has not violated any requirement of the Freedom of Information Act by declining to answer questions.

 

                        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 November 28, 1990.

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 90-257                           Page Three

 

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:

VERA S. ZIMA

114 Lincoln Avenue

Forestville, CT 06010

 

NORTH HAVEN POLICE DEPARTMENT

c/o David A. Ryan, Jr., Esq.

Tyler, Cooper & Alcorn

205 Church Street

P.O. Box 1936

New Haven, CT 06510

 

STATE'S ATTORNEY, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN

c/o Gary W. Nicholson, Esq.

Assistant State's Attorney

235 Church Street

New Haven, CT 06510

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission