FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by Final Decision
Della Construction Company, Inc.,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 92-210
Manchester General Manager,
Respondent April 14, 1993
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on December 18, 1992, 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 May 15, 1992, the complainant requested that the respondent mail it a copy of a May 5, 1992 letter from the complainant to the respondent containing the respondent's date stamp.
3. By letter of complaint dated June 2, 1992 and filed with this Commission on June 4, 1992, the complainant appealed the respondent's failure to respond or comply.
4. It is found that the requested record is a public record within the meaning of 1-18a(d), G.S.
5. The respondent argues that while he has the duty to provide the complaint with a copy of the May 5, 1992 letter, he has no obligation to mail a copy of that letter to the complainant.
6. It is found that some time after June 4, 1992, the complainant went to the respondent's offices, made a second request for the letter at issue, and was given a copy of the letter.
Docket #FIC 92-210 Page 2
7. Section 1-15, G.S., expressly states that "any person applying in writing shall receive, promptly upon request, a plain or certified copy of any public record."
8. It is concluded that while the Freedom of Information Act does not require a public agency to mail to a requester a copy of a public record, 1-15 and 1-19(a), G.S., require an agency to promptly respond to a request for a public record.
9. It is therefore concluded that, the respondent violated the provisions of 1-15 and 1-19(a), G.S., by failing to promptly respond to the complainant's request and inform it that the letter would be available at the respondent's offices.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:
1. Henceforth, the respondent shall strictly comply with the provisions of 1-15 and 1-19(a), G.S.
2. The Commission notes that the complainant maintains a funded account with the town of Manchester to cover the costs of providing copies of the town's public records.
3. In light of the fact that the respondent has mailed copies of public records to the complainant on at least one occasion, the Commission admonishes the respondent for its arrogant refusal to mail the letter at issue to the complainant. Although the Freedom of Information Act does not require such mailing, in the spirit of good faith and public service the letter could have been provided by mail at no cost to the town.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of April 14, 1993.
Debra L. Rembowski
Acting Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC 92-210 Page 3
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:
DELLA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.
c/o Atty. John J. O'Brien, Jr.
Della Construction Co., Inc.
1 Depot Hill Road
P.O. Box 1290
Enfield, CT 06083
MANCHESTER GENERAL MANAGER
c/o Atty. Patricia E. Reilly
Tyler, Cooper & Alcorn
205 Church Street
P.O. Box 1936
New Haven, CT 06509
Debra L. Rembowski
Acting Clerk of the Commission