FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        Final Decision

 

Steven R. Donen and SD Associates,

 

                        Complainants

 

            against              Docket #FIC 93-292

 

Stamford Registrars of Voters,

 

                        Respondents                 April 13, 1994

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on January 11, 1994, at which time the complainants and the respondents appeared and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  On February 25, 1994, the after-filed affidavits of the complainants and the respondents were made full exhibits in this case.

 

            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 October 26, 1993, the complainants alleged that the respondents violated the provisions of the FOI Act by failing to provide to them all available information maintained on computer concerning registered voters in the city of Stamford on magnetic tape.

 

            3.  It is found that by letter dated September 10, 1993, the complainants requested a magnetic tape of all voter registration information including but not limited to birthdates and telephone numbers maintained on computer.

 

            4.  It is found that the information on registered voters in the city of Stamford maintained by the respondents on computer is a public record within the meaning of 1-18a(d), G.S.

 

            5.  It is found that by letter received by the complainants on September 27, 1993, the respondents informed them that they would provide the requested magnetic tape absent information on dates of birth or telephone numbers.

 

            6.  By letter dated December 27, 1993, however, the respondents notified the complainants that after researching the matter and consulting 9-20, 9-23 and 9-58, G.S., they finally concluded that they must disclose to the complainants those records they possess concerning date of birth information, and accordingly they would not take issue with that request.

 

Docket #FIC 93-292                           Page 2

 

            7.  It is concluded that although the respondents are now willing to provide the requested date of birth records to the complainants, the respondents did not provide such records promptly within the meaning of 1-19(a), G.S.

 

            8.  It is accordingly concluded that the respondents violated the provisions of 1-19(a), G.S., pertaining to prompt access of public records with respect to the requested date of birth information.

 

            9.  It is found that although birthdate information is entered by the respondents into their electronic data base, there is no comparable field for telephone numbers, which accordingly are not entered into the respondents' computer system and are therefore not available on magnetic tape.

 

            10.  In light of the findings contained in paragraph 9, above, this Commission concludes that it is unnecessary to consider evidence concerning what steps, if any, were taken by individuals concerned with keeping their telephone numbers out of the public domain.

 

            11.  It is accordingly concluded that under the facts of this case, the respondents did not violate the provisions of the FOI Act when they failed to provide the requested telephone numbers on magnetic tape.

 

            The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint.

 

            1.    The respondents shall forthwith provide to the plaintiffs free of charge a copy of the date of birth information identified in paragraphs 6 and 7 of the findings, above.

 

            2.  Henceforth the respondents shall strictly comply with the provisions of 1-19(a), G.S., concerning prompt access to public records.

 

            3.  That portion of the complaint addressing the issue of access to telephone numbers on electronic media is hereby dismissed.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of April 13, 1994.

 

                                                                 

                                    Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 93-292                           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:

Steven R. Donen, Esq.

SD Associates

P.O. Box 4565

Hartford, CT 06147

 

Stamford Registrars of Voters

c/o Barry Boodman, Esq.

888 Washington Boulevard

Stamford, CT 06904-2152

 

                                                                 

                                    Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission