FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        Final Decision

 

Joseph A. Giannone and Shore Line Newspapers,

 

                        Complainants

 

            against              Docket #FIC 92-189

 

Philip Costello, Madison Town Counsel,

 

                        Respondent                  October 14, 1992

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on July 27, 1992, at which time the complainants and the respondent appeared 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 of complaint filed with this Commission on June 24, 1992, the complainant alleged that the respondent violated the provisions of the FOI Act by denying his May 26, 1992 request for access to and copies of the personnel files of Dennis J. Anziano when he served on the Middletown Police Department.

 

            3.  It is found that on May 29, 1992, the respondent notified Dennis Anziano of the request, and on June 4, Anziano  objected to the release of the respondent's records on the basis of 1-19(b)(2), G.S.

 

            4.  It is found that Dennis Anziano currently serves as the chief of police in the town of Madison.

 

            5.  It is also found that the records at issue relate to Dennis Anziano's previous public employment with the Middletown police department.

 

            6.  It is found that the records at issue are public records within the meaning of 1-19(a), G.S.

 

            7.  It is also found that the records at issue are the former personnel or medical files and similar files of Dennis Anziano.

 

Docket #FIC 92-189                           Page 2

 

 

            8.  It is further found, however, that Dennis Anziano is not now and was not formerly an employee of the respondent.

 

            9.  It is accordingly concluded that the provisions of 1-20a(b) and 1-20a(c), G.S., are inapplicable under the facts of this case.

 

            10.  Dennis Anziano is hereby granted intervenor status in these proceedings.

 

            11.  The Commission takes administrative notice of the record and final decision in contested case docket #FIC 90-118.

 

            12.  It is found that pursuant to the above-referenced case, from which appeal was never taken, the records at issue have already been released to the public with redaction of any names of private civilians to the extent they were contained in the records.  Furthermore, this previously released information has already been published by the news media.

 

            13.  It is accordingly concluded that the claim of exemption pursuant to the personal privacy provision of 1-19(b)(2), G.S., is unsupported. 

 

            14.  It is found that pursuant to 7-109, G.S., the state records administrator granted permission to the Middletown police department to destroy the records at issue on the basis of request by the Middletown police chief, dated March 26, 1992, stating that the records have been held for the length of time required by statute and are no longer needed by that office.

 

            15.  At the hearing into this matter, the intervenor argued that because the Middletown police department disposed of their copies of the records at issue, the Commission should find that technically the respondent's copy of the records at issue does not exist and should not be disclosed.

 

            16.  It is found that the language of 7-109, G.S., is permissive rather than mandatory in nature.  Furthermore, record retention guidelines set forth minimum rather than maximum guidelines for record retention.

 

            17.  It is concluded that the Middletown police department's disposal of the records at issue does not exempt the respondent's records from disclosure.

 

            18.  It is concluded that the respondent's failure to provide the complainants with access to and copies of the requested records constitutes a violation of 1-19(a), G.S.

 

            The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended

 

Docket #FIC 92-189                           Page 3

 

on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint.

 

            1.  The respondent shall forthwith provide to the complainants copies of the requested records with the redaction of any names of private civilians to the extent they are contained in the records.  Such copies shall be provided free of charge.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of October 14, 1992.

 

                                                                 

                                    Debra L. Rembowski

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 92-189                           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:

Joseph A. Giannone and Shore Line Newspapers

c/o Joseph A. Giannone

Journal Inquirer

306 Progress Drive

Manchester, CT 06040

 

Philip Costello, Madison Town Counsel

P.O. Box 16

Madison, CT 06443

 

                                                                 

                                    Debra L. Rembowski

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission