FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by Final Decision
Anthony E. DeNiro,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 93-303
Sergeant Joseph Gaudette, Jr., Department Clerk, Bridgeport Police Department;
Laurie B. Giles, Labor Relations/Benefits Administration; and Dennis
Murphy, Director, Bridgeport Labor Relations/Benefits Administration,
Respondents March 9, 1994
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on December 6, 1993, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint. This case was consolidated for hearing with contested case docket #FIC 93-301.
After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:
1. The respondents are public agencies within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.
2. By letter of complaint filed with this Commission on November 8, 1993, the complainant alleged that the respondents failed to comply with the final decision of September 22, 1993 in contested case docket #FIC 93-150. The complainant also requested the imposition of civil penalties against the respondents.
3. This Commission takes administrative notice of the records and final decisions in contested cases docket #s FIC 93-144 and FIC 93-150, which cases were consolidated for hearing on July 27, 1993.
4. It is found that the respondents neither took an administrative appeal of contested case docket #FIC 93-150 nor did the respondents labor relations/benefits administration officials comply with this Commission's order to provide to the complainant free of charge the computer print-out containing the listing of overtime received by each police officer, as operative under the facts of that case.
Docket #FIC 93-303 Page 2
5. The respondents claim that the document at issue relate to ongoing workers compensation claims.
6. It is found that the respondents are not parties to a workers compensation claim filed by the complainant, nor is the record at issue one of strategy or negotiation within the meaning of 1-19(b)(4), G.S.
7. It is found that Sergeant Gaudette, who mistakenly thought that summarized averages of overtime would satisfy the complainant after the hearings in contested cases docket #93-144 and FIC 93-150, is now willing to provide an existing print-out responsive to the complainant's request, which document goes back to 1990.
8. It is concluded that the respondents labor relations/benefits administration officials violated the provisions of 1-19a(a), G.S., under the facts of this case.
9. It is concluded that the respondents labor relations/ benefits administration officials denied a copy of the record at issue to the complainant without reasonable grounds.
10. It is concluded that the respondent Bridgeport police department clerk is technically not in violation of the order of this Commission in contested case docket #FIC 93-150 under the facts of this case.
11. It is concluded, however, that the respondents labor relations/benefits administration officials failed to comply with the order of this Commission in contested case docket #93-150, within the meaning of 1-21k(b), G.S.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint.
1. With respect to the Bridgeport Police Department clerk, the case for non-compliance in contested case docket #FIC 93-150 is dismissed.
2. The respondents labor relations/benefits administration officials shall forthwith provide to the complainant, free of charge, a copy of the record at issue identified in paragraphs 4 and 7 of the findings, above.
3. In its discretion, this Commission levies a civil penalty against the respondents labor relations/benefits administration officials jointly and severally in the amount of $150.00, which amount is payable to this Commission within thirty (30) calendar days of the mailing of the notice of the final decision in this case.
Docket #FIC 93-303 Page 3
4. Although at this time the Commission in its discretion declines to refer this case to prosecuting authorities for enforcement pursuant to the provisions of 1-21k(b), G.S., failure to strictly comply with the instant order shall put the respondents labor relations/benefits administration officials at such risk.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of March 9, 1994.
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC 93-303 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. Anthony E. DeNiro
P.O. Box 311
Laurel, FL 34272
Sergeant Joseph Gaudette, Jr., Department Clerk, Bridgeport Police Department; Laurie B. Giles, Labor Relations/Benefits Administration; and Dennis Murphy, Director, Bridgeport Labor Relations/Benefits Administration
c/o John Barton, Esq.
Office of Bridgeport City Attorney
202 State Street
Bridgeport, CT 06604
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the Commission