FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        Final Decision

 

Shirley Vigneri,

 

                                Complainant

 

                against                   Docket #FIC 95-82

 

Windham First Taxing District,

 

                                Respondent                          March 13, 1996

 

                The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on October 27 and December 26, 1995, and February 29, 1996, at which times 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.  The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

                2.  By letter of complaint dated March 27, 1995 and filed with the Commission on March 28, 1995, the complainant appealed alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information ("FOI") Act by:

 

                                a.             failing to provide her with access to inspect records on March 22, 1995;

 

                                b.             requiring her to put her requests in writing or to set up an appointment to inspect records;

 

                                c.             failing to maintain an office;

 

                                d.             failing to post office hours as ordered by the Commission in docket #FIC 93-245, Paul L. Trowbridge v. Paulette Haines, District Clerk, Windham First Taxing District and Donald Williams, Jr., Windham Town Attorney, (hereinafter, "FIC 93-245");

 

                                e.             failing to maintain all of the respondent's public records at the Windham town clerk's office as ordered by the Public Records Administrator on August 3, 1994; and

 

Docket #FIC 95-82                                               Page 2

 

                                f.              maintaining inadequate office hours of 9:00am to 12:00 noon every third Saturday.

 

                3.  The Commission takes administrative notice of the file, record and final decision in contested case docket #FIC 93-245 and in particular its order which reads:

 

                                1.  Henceforth, the respondent district and district clerk shall fully comply with the provisions of 1-19(a), G.S.

 

                                2.  In accordance with 1-19(a), G.S., the respondent district clerk shall forthwith arrange to:

 

                                (a) either designate an accessible office or principal place of business and cause to be located there all of the district's public records, with regular office hours held and posted at both the designated location and in the town clerk's office, or

 

                                (b) place the district's public records in the town clerk's office.

 

                                3.  The respondent district clerk shall provide the Commission with an affidavit attesting to the placement of the district's public records in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2 of this order, above, within thirty (30) days of the date of mailing of the notice of final decision in this case. [Emphases added.]

 

                4.  With respect to the allegations as described in paragraph 2a. and 2b., above, it is found that on March 22, 1995 the complainant requested that Dawn Niles (the then president of the respondent) allow her to inspect the records of the respondent; that Niles produced a briefcase containing certain of the respondent's records including agendas, minutes and the by-laws, however, no bills, records of bids or correspondence were provided; that Niles told the complainant that she should put her request to inspect records in writing and Niles would make arrangements to get the information to her, or the complainant could set up an appointment to inspect the records.

 

                5.  It is also found that Victor Rayhall, the respondent's current president, maintains a policy that requests for access to inspect records be put in writing, supplemented by a policy that the requester may also contact him or his designee and indicate what records are needed.

 

Docket #FIC 95-82                                               Page 3

 

                6.  With respect to the allegation as described in paragraph 2c., above, it is found that the respondent does not maintain a regular office or place of business; and that the public does not have access to inspect records without advance notice to Rayhall or his designee who then arranges to provide access.

 

                7.  It is found that all of the records described in paragraphs 4 and 6, above, are public records within the meaning of 1-18a(d) and 1-19(a), G.S.

 

                8.  With respect to the allegation as described in paragraph 2d., above, it is found that the respondent, following the Commission's order in FIC 93-245, posted on the town green office hours of 9:00am - 12:00 noon every third Saturday.

 

                9.  With respect to the allegation as described in paragraph 2e., above, it is found that following the Commission's order in FIC 93-245 the Public Records Administrator on August 3, 1994, in response to a complaint filed with the Public Records Administrator by the complainant, instructed the respondent to deposit the respondent's records at the town hall; that on May 3, 1995, the Public Records Administrator rescinded the August 3, 1994 instruction believing that the respondent's "records are on file with the clerk of the respondent and are available to the public"; and that all of the respondent's public records are not in fact on file with the clerk of the district but some are maintained by Rayhall, some by the treasurer, some by the town clerk and some locked in the filing cabinet, described in paragraph 6, above.

 

                10.  With respect to the allegation as described in paragraph 2f., above, it is found that following the Commission's order in FIC 93-245 the respondent maintained office hours of every third Saturday between 9:00 am. and 12:00 noon at the South Windham firehouse; that since taking office in April 1995 Rayhall has changed those hours to one hour and fifteen minutes prior to the respondent's meetings; that the respondent meets approximately four times per year; that the respondent's regular office or business hours are presently one hour and fifteen minutes prior to each meeting of the respondent at which time the public may inspect or copy the records kept in the filing cabinet, described in paragraph 6, above.

 

                11.  It is found that by maintaining its public records in the numerous locations, described in paragraph 9, above, and in particular by maintaining records in the locked filing cabinet, described in paragraph 6, above, which cabinet is not accessible

 

Docket #FIC 95-82                                               Page 4

 

for inspection except for one hour and fifteen minutes four times per year or with advance notice to the president or his designee, the respondent has failed to comply with 1-19(a), G.S., which gives the public a right to inspect records promptly during regular office or business hours.

 

                12.  Section 1-19(a), G.S., requires that all public records in the custody of the public agency be kept by the town clerk if the agency does not have a regular office or place of business.

 

                13.  It is concluded that the respondent failed to comply with the Commission's order in FIC 93-245.

 

                14.  It is also concluded that by requiring the complainant to put her request to inspect records in writing the respondent violated 1-19(a), G.S., by creating a condition precedent that is not authorized under the FOI Act.

 

                15.  Further, it is concluded that the present office hours of one hour and fifteen minutes prior to each meeting when  meetings are held approximately four times per year violates 1-19(a), G.S., which provides the public the right to inspect records promptly.

 

                16.  It is also concluded that the violations described in paragraphs 13 through 15, inclusive, were without reasonable grounds.

 

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

 

                1.  The respondent taxing district shall immediately remit to this commission a civil penalty in the amount of $1000.00.

 

                2.  The respondent shall within 2 weeks of the receipt of the notice of the final decision in this matter place ALL of the public records of the district in the town clerk's office.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of March 13, 1996.

 

                                                                             

                                                Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                                Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 95-82                                               Page 5

 

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:

Shirley Vigneri

P.O. Box 93

South Windham, CT 06266

 

Windham First Taxing District

c/o Nicholas F. Kepple, Esq.

Kepple & Morgan, P.C.

Box 3A Anguilla Road

Pawcatuck, CT 06379

 

                                                                             

                                                Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                                Acting Clerk of the Commission