FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        FINAL DECISION

 

Barbara Baker,

 

                        Complainant

 

            against              Docket #FIC 94-110

 

Ridgefield Town Clerk, Ridgefield First Selectman

and Ridgefield Personnel Director,

 

                        Respondents                 January 11, 1995

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on September 20, 1994, at which time the complainant appeared but the respondents failed to appear.

 

            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 dated April 4, 1994 and filed April 5, 1994, the complainant appealed to the Commission alleging that on March 31, 1994, she was denied prompt access to inspect certain public records requested in a memorandum directed to the respondents town clerk and first selectman, and which she ultimately left with the respondent personnel director.

 

            3.  More specifically, in the memorandum referred to in paragraph 2, above, the complainant requested to inspect the following records:

 

            a.  "tape recordings and minutes of any meeting of the board of finance and or board of selectmen on August 25, 1993;"

 

            b.  "cop[ies] of any and all drafts of lease agreements with SNETCO in 1993 or 1994;"

 

            c.  "copies of any documents regarding any restructuring of the position of assistant controller or assistant director of finance which existed prior to January 24, 1994;" and

 

            d.  "personnel files of Mr. Wahlberg and Mr. Hoff."

 

Docket #FIC 94-110                           Page 2

 

            4.  By the date of the hearing in this matter, all records responsive to the complainant's request to inspect had been provided to her, except for the minutes and tape recordings of the Ridgefield Board of Finance meeting of August 25, 1993.

 

            5.  It is found that the complainant failed to name the Ridgefield Board of Finance as a respondent in her complaint.

 

            6.  Consequently, the Commission lacks jurisdiction to order the disclosure of records in the custody of the Ridgefield Board of Finance in this case.

 

            7.  It is also found that the complainant did not bring her request to inspect records to the respondent town clerk.

 

            8.  Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed as it applies to the respondent town clerk.

 

            9.  Thus, the sole issue remaining to be determined by the Commission is whether the respondents compliance with the complainant's request to inspect public records in this case was prompt, within the meaning of 1-19(a) and 1-15(a), G.S.

 

            10.  In material part, 1-19(a), G.S., provides:

 

            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.

 

            11.  In material part, 1-15(a), G.S., provides:

 

            Any person applying in writing shall receive, promptly upon request, a plain or certified copy of any public record.

 

            12.  It is found that under the facts of this case, the respondents failed to comply promptly with the complainant's rquest to inspect public records, except with respect to the minutes of the board of selectmen's August 25, 1993 meeting and a lease agreement with SNETCO, which were provided to the complainant on March 31, 1994; and Mr. Wahlberg's personnel file to which the complainant was granted access after Mr. Wahlberg was duly afforded an opportunity to object to its disclosure.

 

Docket #FIC 94-110                           Page 3

 

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

 

            1.  Henceforth, the respondents first selectman and personnel director shall strictly comply with the provisions of 1-15(a) and 1-19(a), G.S.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of January 11, 1995.

 

                                                                 

                                    Debra L. Rembowski

                                    Clerk of the Commission

 

 

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:

BARBARA BAKER

c/o William M. Laviano, Esq.

Laviano & LoCascio, P.A.

90 Grove Street, Suite 206

Ridgefield, CT 06877-4114

 

RIDGEFIELD TOWN CLERK, RIDGEFIELD FIRST SELECTMAN AND RIDGEFIELD PERSONNEL DIRECTOR

c/o J. Allen Kerr, Jr., Esq.

Ridgefield Town Attorney

24 Bailey Avenue

Ridgefield, CT 06877

 

                                                                 

                                    Debra L. Rembowski

                                    Clerk of the Commission