FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        Final Decision

 

Peter P. Samolyk,

 

                                Complainant

 

                against                   Docket #FIC 91-167

 

Mary B. Amenta, Cromwell First Selectman,

 

                                Respondent                          June 24, 1992

 

                The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on September 19, 1991, 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.  It is found that by letter dated June 19, 1991 the complainant requested from the respondent:  a copy of Cromwell Police Officer Edwin L. Kosinski's (hereinafter "Kosinski") employment application for the Cromwell Police Department (hereinafter "CPD");  copies of any complaints pertaining to Kosinski; a copy of Kosinski's personnel file and copies of all information in the possession of the respondent or the town of Cromwell (hereinafter "town") concerning Kosinski.

 

                3.  It is found that the respondent is a custodian of the requested records.

 

                4.  It is also found that by letter dated June 21, 1991, a Lieutenant of the CPD informed the respondent of Kosinski's graduation date from the Connecticut Police Academy, the date of his employment with the town as a police officer and that Kosinski is a certified police officer as required by

 

Docket #FIC 91-167                                             Page 2

 

Connecticut law.  The Lieutenant informed the respondent however, that it is the CPD's practice not to release any personnel records of its officers without their written consent.

 

                5.  It is found that by letter dated June 24, 1991, the respondent provided the complainant with the information described in paragraph 4, above.

 

                6.  By letter dated June 26, 1991 and filed June 28, 1991 the complainant appealed to the Commission alleging that the respondent failed to provide access to the requested information and requesting that the Commission impose civil penalties upon the respondent.

 

                7.  It is found that by letter dated September 9, 1991, the respondent informed Kosinski that he could object to disclosure of the requested records.

 

                8.  It is found that by letter to the respondent dated September 11, 1991, Kosinski objected to disclosure of any records maintained by the town pertaining to him or his employment with the town.

 

                9.  It is concluded that the requested records are public records within the meaning of 1-18a(d), G.S.

 

                10.  The respondent maintains that the requested records are exempt from disclosure pursuant to 1-19(b)(2), G.S., which permits the nondisclosure of "personnel or medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute an invasion of personal privacy."

 

                11.  It is found that the information requested from the respondent is information contained in Kosinski's personnel file.

 

                12.  The respondent further maintains that the Supreme Court's decision in Chairman v. Freedom of Information Commission, 217 Conn. 193 (1990), supports the contention that Kosinski has a reasonable expectation that the information contained in his personnel records will remain confidential.

 

                13.  On November 5, 1991, the respondent submitted for in camera inspection, Kosinski's entire personnel file.

 

                14.  It is found that there are a total of seventeen documents or groupings of documents submitted by the respondent for in camera review:

 

Docket #FIC 91-167                                             Page 3

 

                (a)  Kosinski's  complete application for employment with

                                the CPD including attachments (in camera document

                                #91-167-1);

 

                (b)           Health insurance claim forms (in camera document #91-

                                167-2);

 

                (c)           Kosinski's driving record submitted to the CPD by the

                                Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles (in camera

                                document #91-167-3);

 

                (d)           Letter from the CPD to the Massachusetts    

                                Registry of Motor Vehicles requesting Kosinski's

                                driving record, dated July 18, 1989 (in camera

                                document #91-167-4);

 

                (e)           Letter of commendation from Captain Salvatore of the

                                CPD to Kosinski, dated July 13, 1991 (in camera

                                document #91-167-5);

 

                (f)            Memorandum from the respondent's office indicating an

                                update in Kosinski's insurance policy, dated October

                                28, 1991 (in camera document #91-167-6);

 

                (g)           Records of Kosinski's requests for sick leave, vacation

                                time, personal days and funeral leave (in camera

                                document #91-167-7);

 

                (h)           State of Connecticut and federal W-4 forms (in camera

                                document #91-167-8);

 

                (i)            Request to the CPD for verification of Kosinski's

                                employment (in camera document #91-167-9);

 

                (j)            Driver training course for police officers        

                                certification, dated May 3, 1990 (in camera document

                                #91-167-10);

 

                (k)           Blue Cross/Blue Shield application and claim forms (in

                                camera document #91-167-11);

 

                (l)            Reports of personnel action indicating Kosinski's

                                salary upgrades (in camera document #91-167-12);

 

                (m)          Trainee Performance Report from the Municipal Police

                                Training Council, Connecticut Police Academy, dated

                                June 4, 1990 (in camera document #91-167-13);

 

Docket #FIC 91-167                                             Page 4

 

                (n)           Retirement beneficiary records, including a copy of

                                Kosinski's Social Security Card (in camera document

                                #91-167-14);

 

                (o)           Employment Agreement between the town and Kosinski and

                                employment eligibility information (in camera document

                                #91-167-15);

 

                (p)           Copies of Kosinski's Social Security Card and

                                Connecticut Driver's License; (in camera document

                                #91-167-16); and

 

                (q)           An unidentified computer printout (in camera document

         #91-167-17).

 

                15.  After a thorough review of the documents described in paragraph 14, above, it is found that in camera document #'s 91-167-4, 91-167-5, 91-167-10, 91-167-12, 91-167-13, 91-167-15 91-167-16 and 91-167-17, other than references to social security number, do not contain any personal information or information that would otherwise be embarassing to Kosinski, that consequently their disclosure would not constitute an invasion of Kosinski's right to personal privacy and it is therefore concluded that the respondent violated 1-19(a), G.S., by failing to provide the complainant with access to such records, excluding Kosinski's social security number.

 

                16.  It is also found that in camera document #'s  91-167-2, 91-167-3, 91-167-6 and 91-167-11 contain either personal, medical or insurance information, or information that might be embarrassing to Kosinski if it were disclosed and that consequently disclosure would invade Kosinski's right to personal privacy within the meaning of 1-19(b)(2), G.S.

 

                17.  It is found that portions of in camera document #91-167-1, which is twenty-nine pages in length, contains certain personal or medical information or information that might be embarrassing to Kosinski if disclosed.  Such information is found in the following pages:

 

                Page 1 - Segments B., C. and D. thereof contain personal

                                   family information, and Segment A., only to the

                                   extent idenitifies Kosinski's social security

                                   number;

                Page 2 - Segment E. thereof contains medical history

                                    information;

                Page 3 - Segment G. thereof contains medical information;

                Page 5 - Part III. contains personal information that might

                                    be embarrassing to Kosinski if disclosed;

 

Docket #FIC 91-167                                             Page 5

 

                Page 6  - Part IV. contains information concerning 

                                     Kosinski's marital status;

                Page 18 - Part X. contains personal credit and debt

                                     information; and

                Pages 26

                through 29 - in their entirety contain personal credit

                                        report information.

 

                18.  It is therefore concluded that disclosure of the information described in paragraph 17, above, would violate Kosinski's right to personal privacy within the meaning of 1-19(b)(2), G.S.

 

                19.  It is further found that the remaining portions of in camera document #91-167-1, excluding a reference to Kosinski's social security number in page 21, would not reveal personal or embarrassing information, and it is concluded therefore that such information is disclosable to the complainant pursuant to 1-19(a), G.S.

 

                20.  It is found that the only personal information contained in in camera document #91-167-7 is the relationship to Kosinski of the person for whom he requested funeral leave in  May of 1991 and it is therefore concluded that such information is exempt from disclosure, pursuant to 1-19(b)(2), G.S.

 

                21.  It is also found that in camera document #91-167-9 contains personal information to the extent it identifies the reason employment verification was requested from the CPD and Kosinski's social security number, and it is therefore concluded that such information is exempt from disclosure, pursuant to 1-19(b)(2), G.S.

 

                22.  It is further concluded however that the remaining portions of in camera document #'s 91-167-7 and 91-167-9 are disclosable to the complainant pursuant to 1-19(a), G.S.

 

                23.  With respect to in camera document #91-167-8, it is found that the documents contain tax witholding information and it is concluded that such information is exempt from disclosure pursuant to 1-19(b)(2), G.S.

 

                24.  It is found that in camera document #91-167-14 contains personal information, namely Kosinski's designated retirement beneficiary and certain financial information concerning retirement deductions from Kosinski's income, and it is concluded therefore that such information is exempt from disclosure pursuant to 1-19(b)(2), G.S.

 

Docket #FIC 91-167                                             Page 6

 

                25.  It is also found that the remaining portions of in camera document #'s 91-167-8 and 91-167-14 consist of information that is obtainable from the disclosable documents described in paragraphs 15, 19 and 22, above, and the Commission therefore declines to order disclosure of said remaining portions of in camera document #'s 91-167-8 and 91-167-14.

 

                26.  The Commission in its discretion declines to impose a civil penalty upon the respondent.

 

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

 

                1.  The respondent shall forthwith provide the complainant with copies of the in camera documents described in paragraph   15 of the findings, above.

 

                2.  The respondent shall forthwith provide the complainant with copies of the disclosable portions of the in camera records described in paragraphs 19 and 22, of the findings above.

 

                3.  In complying with paragraphs 1 and 2 of this order, the respondent may mask Kosinski's social security number on any document which lists said number, any information concerning Kosinski's marital status and any other information that is exempt from disclosure pursuant to 1-19(b)(2), G.S.

 

Docket #FIC 91-167                                             Page 7

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of June 24, 1992.

 

                                                                             

                                                Karen J.Haggett

                                                Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 91-167                                             Page 8

 

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:

Peter Samolyk

476 Main Street

Cromwell, CT  06416

 

Jean M. D'Aquila, Esq.

Halloran & Sage

800 Plaza Middlesex

Middletown, CT  06457

 

                                                                             

                                                Karen J.Haggett

                                                Clerk of the Commission