FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by Final Decision
Eric Lipton, Anita M. Seline and The Hartford Courant,
Complainants
against Docket #FIC 93-75
Hartford Purchasing Department,
Respondent November 10, 1993
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on July 7, 1993, at which time the complainants 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 dated March 4, 1993, the complainants requested of the respondent access to inspect and copy certain files containing the applications and evaluations of ten construction management companies that had responded to the City of Hartford's request for proposal to perform construction management services on the Moylan Elementary School project.
3. By letter dated March 8, 1993, the respondent denied the complainants' request claiming that release of the requested records during the procurement process could jeopardize the competitive element of the process.
4. By letter dated March 23, 1993 and filed with the Commission on March 24, 1993, the complainants appealed to the Commission alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information (hereinafter "FOI") Act by denying them access to the requested records.
5. At the hearing in this matter, the respondent provided the complainants with access to all of the requested records. Consequently, the only issue before the Commission is a determination of whether such access was prompt pursuant to 1-15 and 1-19(a), G.S.
6. The respondent contends that the requested records are confidential during the procurement process, until the respondent receives a signed letter of intent from the successful construction management company.
Docket #FIC 93-75 Page 2
7. In furtherance of this contention, the respondent cites 1-19(b)(7), G.S., which provides that nothing in the Freedom of Information Act shall require disclosure of:
(7) the contents of real estate appraisals, engineering or feasibility estimates and evaluations made for or by an agency relative to the acquisition of property or to prospective public supply and construction contracts, until such time as all of the property has been acquired or all proceedings or transactions have been terminated or abandoned, provided the law of eminent domain shall not be affected by this provision.
8. The complainants on the other hand contend that 1-19(b)(7), G.S., is inapplicable and that they were entitled to prompt access to the records immediately following their request.
9. Section 1-19(a), G.S., provides in relevant part:
Except as otherwise provided by any federal law or state statute, all records maintained or kept on file by any public agency ... shall be public records and every person shall have the right to inspect such records promptly during regular office or business hours or to receive a copy of such records in accordance with the provisions of section 1-15.
10. It is found that the requested records are public records within the meaning of 1-19(a), G.S.
11. It is found that 1-19(b)(7), G.S., does not exempt from public disclosure the applications provided in response to an agency's request for proposal for construction management services, or the agency's evaluations of such applications.
12. It is therefore concluded that in the absence of a state statute that permits the confidentiality of what amounts to bid documents and the evaluations thereof, the respondent violated 1-15 and 1-19(a), G.S., when it failed to provide prompt access to inspect the records requested by the complainants in their March 4, 1993 letter.
Docket #FIC 93-75 Page 3
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.
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 93-75 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. Eric Lipton
Ms. Anita M. Seline
The Hartford Courant
285 Broad Street
Hartford, CT 06115
Hartford Purchasing Department
c/o Karen K. Buffkin, Esq.
City of Hartford
550 Main Street
Hartford, CT 06103
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the Commission