FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        Final Decision

 

Richard Plaskonka,

 

                        Complainant

 

            against              Docket #FIC 91-282

 

Philip Schnabel, Chief of Police, Rocky Hill Police Department, Sergeant Ronald Boske, Rocky Hill Police Department, Rocky Hill Police Department, O. Paul Shew, Rocky Hill Town Manager and Town of Rocky Hill,

 

                        Respondents                 March 25, 1992

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on February 14, 1992, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  This case was consolidated for the purposes of hearing with Docket #FIC 91-279 and 91-329.

 

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

 

            1.         The respondents are public agencies within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

            2.         By letter of complaint filed on September 12, 1991, the complainant appealed to the Commission, alleging that his request to listen to a police dispatch tape had been denied, and requesting that the Commission levy civil penalties against the respondents.

 

            3.         It is found that the complainant on August 15, 1991 requested that the respondent Sergeant Boske provide him with access to listen to the respondent Department's August 14, 1991 dispatch tape.

 

            4.         It is found that the complainant sought to listen to the portion of the tape consisting of radio communications from the police dispatcher to police radio units.

 

            5.         It is found that the requested tape is a public record within the meaning of 1-18a(d) and 1-19(a), G.S.

 

            6.         It is found that Sergeant Boske directed the complainant to return at 4:00 p.m. when Lieutenant Hedeen, who was authorized to retrieve the tape and monitor the tape-playing equipment, would be on duty.

 

Docket #FIC 91-282                           Page 2

 

            7.         It is found that neither Sergeant Boske nor any other officer on duty at the time of the complainant's request was authorized to retrieve and play the dispatch tape.

 

            8.         It is found that the complainant was given approximately 15 minutes to listen to the tape after he returned at 4:00 p.m. that day.

 

            9.         It is found that the complainant requested four hours to listen to the tape.

 

            10.       It is found that the respondents refused to grant the complainant extended listening time until the two other officers authorized to retrieve and play the tapes returned from vacation in September.

 

            11.       It is found that the respondents provided the complainant another one and one-quarter hours to listen to the tape on September 10, 1991, but refused to grant him more than an additional 15 minutes of listening time.

 

            12.       It is found that the complainant declined to identify what he was looking for on the tape.

 

            13.       It is found that the complainant identified no specific time limits within which he needed to finish listening to the tape.

 

            14.       It is concluded that the respondents provided reasonably prompt access for the complainant to listen to the tape.

 

            15.       It is also concluded, however, that the respondents violated 1-19(a), G.S., by refusing to provide the complainant additional time to listen to the balance of the requested dispatch tape.

 

            16.       It is found that, shortly after receipt of the complaint, the Commission notified that the respondents that they should retain the tape, but that the respondents had re-used the tape when they received the Commission's communication.

 

            17.       It is also found that the respondents' mistakenly retained the August 16, 1991 dispatch tape instead of the August 14 tape.

 

            18.       The Commission in its discretion declines to impose civil penalties against the respondents.

 

            The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:

 

Docket #FIC 91-282                           Page 3

 

            1.         The respondents shall henceforth strictly comply with the requirements of 1-19(a), G.S.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of March 25, 1992.

 

                                                                 

                                    Debra L. Rembowski

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 91-282                           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:

Richard Plaskonka

P.O. Box 4382

Hartford, CT 06146

 

Philip Schnabel, Chief of Police Rocky Hill Police Department Sergeant Ronald Boske, Rocky Hill Police Department Rocky Hill Police Department O. Paul Shew, Rocky Hill Town Manager Town of Rocky Hill

c/o Attorney Curtis Roggi

Roggi & Stuhlman

1160 Silas Deane Highway

Wethersfield, CT 06109

 

                                                                 

                                    Debra L. Rembowski

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission