FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by Final Decision
Genaro R. Velez, Jr.,
Complainant
against Docket # FIC 93-64
New London Police Department,
Respondent September 8, 1993
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on June 29, 1993, 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. By letter of complaint filed March 11, 1993, the complainant appealed to the Commission, alleging that his February 8 and 18, 1993 requests to the respondent were not promptly complied with.
3. It is found that the complainant by letter dated February 8, 1993 made a written request to the New London acting chief of police, who was also the city manager, for an opportunity to review his personnel file maintained at the New London police department, including all records of prior investigations of him.
4. It is found that the complainant, receiving no reply to his February 8 request, hand delivered a written request to the deputy chief on February 18, 1993, for the same records.
5. It is found that the records requested by the complainant are public records within the meaning of 1-18a(d) and 1-19(a), G.S.
6. It is found that the deputy chief believed that he had to check with the city's law director before providing access to records of prior investigations of the complainant.
7. It is found that the records of prior investigations are filed separately from the complainant's personnel file.
Docket #FIC 93-64 Page 2
8. It is found that the deputy chief began searching for the records of prior investigations on approximately February 25, 1993.
9. It is found that the deputy chief completed his search for the records of prior investigations on approximately March 15, 1993.
10. It is found that the complainant made repeated inquiries of the city law director and the respondent as to the readiness of the records.
11. It is found that the complainant received inconsistent replies to his queries from the two agencies, and was not given an opportunity to inspect the requested records.
12. It is found that the respondent did not notify the complainant that the records of prior investigations and his personnel file were available for inspection until April 7, 1993, following a request received by the respondent on April 6, 1993 by the Day newspaper to review the same records.
13. It is concluded that the respondent violated 1-19(a), G.S., by failing to provide, promptly upon request, access to inspect the requested records.
14. The respondent filed with the Commission on June 18, 1993 an answer and counterclaim, in which the respondent seeks damages and costs for defending this complaint because the complainant did not avail himself of the respondent's April 7, 1993 offer to inspect the requested records.
15. The respondent's request for damages and costs is denied.
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 promptness requirements of 1-19(a), G.S.
2. Within one week of the date of mailing of the final decision in this matter, the respondent shall provide the complainant, at no cost, copies of the the documents described in paragraph 3 of the findings, above.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of September 8, 1993.
Debra L. Rembowski
Acting Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC 93-64 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:
Genaro R. valez, Jr.
1024 East Lake Road
Oakdale, CT 06370
New London Police Department
c/o Atty. Thomas Londregan
Conway, Londregan & McNamara
38 Huntington Street
P. O. Box 1351
New London, CT 06320
Debra L. Rembowski
Acting Clerk of the Commission