FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by Final Decision
Robert Fromer,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 93-55
New London Director of Law,
Respondent November 10, 1993
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on July 9, 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. By letter dated March 1, 1993 and filed with the Commission on March 3, 1993, the complainant appealed to the Commission alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information (hereinafter, "FOI") Act by failing to maintain public records in a regular office or place of business.
2. The complainant contends that a few days prior to filing his FOI complaint he requested of the respondent, but was denied, access to the respondent's place of business where the public records of the New London Department of law are kept and maintained.
3. The respondent contends that he is not a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S., and that disclosure of the requested records at this time would render his appeal of the FOI Commission's decision in Docket # FIC 92-71, Robert Fromer v. New London Director of Law, (hereinafter "FIC 92-71"), moot.
4. The Commission takes administrative notice of the record and decision in FIC 92-71.
5. In FIC 92-71, the Commission concluded in pertinent part that, "when acting in his capacity as New London Director of Law, the current incumbent respondent is himself a City official and therefore a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S."
6. It is concluded that for purposes of this case, the respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.
Docket #FIC 93-55 Page 2
7. Section 1-19(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that:
[E]ach ... agency shall keep and maintain all public records in its custody at its regular office or place of business in an accessible place, and if there is no such office or place of business, the public records ... shall be kept in the office of the clerk of the political subdivision in which such public agency is located or of the secretary of the state, as the case may be.
8. In FIC 92-71, the Commission concluded in pertinent part that:
the respondent [New London Director of Law] as head of New London's Department of Law, is responsible for keeping and maintaining the department's records ... as required by 1-19(a), G.S., and for obtaining, on request for inspection or copying, all records to which the agency itself is legally entitled.
9. It is found that while acting in his capacity as New London's Director of Law, the respondent's present private place of business also serves as his regular office or place of business.
10. It is also found that the respondent presently keeps and maintains public records at his present private place of business.
11. It is concluded that the respondent violated 1-19(a), G.S., when he failed to provide the complainant with prompt access to his place of business, where the public records of the New London Department of law are kept and maintained.
Docket #FIC 93-55 Page 3
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 access to his place of business where the public records of the New London Department of Law are kept and maintained.
2. Henceforth, the respondent shall strictly comply with the provisions of 1-19(a), G.S.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of November 10, 1993.
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC 93-55 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:
Mr. Robert Fromer
281 Gardner Avenue, J4
New London, CT 06320
New London Director of Law
c/o Leo J. McNamara, Esq.
Conway, Londregan & McNamara
38 Huntington Street
P.O. Box 1351
New London, CT 06320
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the Commission