FREEDOM
OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
|
In the Matter of a Complaint by |
FINAL DECISION |
||
|
David Paletsky, |
|
||
|
|
Complainant |
|
|
|
|
against |
Docket #FIC 2000-254 |
|
|
Richard
Grinvalsky, Chairman, |
|
||
|
|
Respondents |
July 26, 2000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested
case on June 12, 2000, at which time 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 §1-200(1),
G.S.
2. By letter dated May 1, 2000, the complainant requested that the respondent provide him with copies of:
a. the cease and desist order [hereinafter “the order”] placed in front of the respondent by the Planning and Zoning Officer at the March 1, 2000 meeting of the Morris Planning and Zoning Commission [hereinafter “the meeting”];
b. the notes and or letter the Zoning Enforcement Officer read from during the meeting related to the “type of person David Paletsky is” [hereinafter “the notes”]; and
c. the complete set of files the Zoning Enforcement Officer brought to the meeting concerning the complainant or Paletsky properties [hereinafter “the files”].
3. By letter dated May 17, 2000, and filed with the Commission on May 22, 2000, the complainant appealed to this Commission, alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act by failing to respond to the request described in paragraph 2, above. The complainant requested the imposition of maximum civil penalties in this matter.
4. Section 1-210(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that:
"[e]xcept as otherwise provided by any federal law or state statute, all records maintained or kept on file by any public agency, whether or not such records are required by any law or by any rule or regulation, 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 1-212...."
[Emphasis added.]
5. It is found that the files, as described in paragraph 2.c, above, consist of an earlier complaint filed with the Morris Planning and Zoning Commission by the complainant herein, and related materials.
6. It is found that the order and the files, as described in paragraphs 2.a and 2.c, above, are public records within the meaning of §1-210(a), G.S.
7. It is found that the respondent has no objection to providing the complainant with copies of the order and the files. It is further found that the respondent’s failure to so provide such records was due, in part, to his misplacement of the request letter described in paragraph 2, above, soon after its receipt.
8. It is concluded that the respondent violated the promptness provision of §1-210(a), G.S., by failing to promptly provide the complainant with copies of the order and the files.
9. It is found that, during the meeting described in paragraph 2, above, Robert McNamara, the Morris Zoning Enforcement Officer, who is an employee of the Morris Planning and Zoning Commission, but not a member thereof, responded to a complaint filed against him by the complainant, related to uses of Mr. McNamara’s property. It is further found that, during such response, Mr. McNamara spoke about the complainant and consulted documents which he had brought with him to the meeting, and which he had prepared at his home. It is found that such documents constitute the requested notes described in paragraph 2.b, above.
10. It is found that Mr. McNamara did not recuse himself from participating in the complaint described in paragraph 9, above, and that Mr. McNamara was paid by the town of Morris for his attendance at the meeting, including the time spent responding to such complaint. The complainant contends that because of such facts, the notes are public records subject to disclosure, pursuant to §1-210(a), G.S.
11. It is found that, notwithstanding the findings described in paragraph 10, above, Mr. McNamara was acting in his personal, rather than official, capacity during his response as described in paragraph 9, above. It is further found that the notes are Mr. McNamara’s personal records, that they are not kept on file or maintained by the respondent, and that therefore they are not public records within the meaning of §1-210(a), G.S.
12. It is concluded that the respondent did not violate the FOI Act by failing to provide the complainant with a copy of the notes, as alleged in the complaint.
13. The Commission declines to impose a civil penalty in this matter.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:
1. If he has not already done so, the respondent shall forthwith provide the complainant with a copy of the order and the files, free of charge.
2. Henceforth, the respondent shall strictly comply with the promptness provision of §1-210(a), G.S.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of July 26, 2000.
_________________________
Melanie R. Balfour
Acting 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:
David Paletsky
215 East Street
Morris, CT 06763-0022
Richard Grinvalsky, Chairman, Planning and Zoning Commission, Town of Morris
c/o Atty. Sharon P. Churchill
Cohn Birnbaum & Shea
100 Pearl Street
Hartford, CT 06103-4500
__________________________
Melanie R. Balfour
Acting Clerk of the Commission
FIC2000-254FD/mrb/07/27/00