FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by			FINAL DECISION
John Rose,
		Complainant
	against		Docket #FIC 2000-319
Town Treasurer, Town of Somers,
		Respondents	September 13, 2000

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on July 19, 2000, at which time the complainant and the respondent appeared, 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.  It is found that, by letter dated May 26, 2000, the complainant requested that the respondent provide him with copies of  “all payments made by Linda Percoski for town insurance to the town of Somers; and all subsidized payments made by the Town of Somers to [the] insurance company for Linda Percoski…the cobra insurance certification letter sent to the town of Somers, all attorney fees to the town of Somers for union negotiations and lawsuits for the years 1997-1998-1999, [and] all the copies of the first selectman personal expenditures or expense account receipts for the years 1997-1998-1999.” [emphasis added]

 

            3.  It is found that, on June 1, 2000, the complainant’s spouse appeared at the office of the respondent, paid thirteen dollars for copies, and received from the respondent’s assistant records responsive to the request described in paragraph 2, above.  Specifically, it is found that the respondent provided copies of town of Somers receipts issued to Linda Percoski for insurance payments made; insurance company invoices issued to the town of Somers for coverage of Linda Percoski, a record of enrollment of Linda Percoski with the insurer, a record of cobra continuation for Linda Percoski, a multi-page computer printout of payments made by CBIA service corporation for the years 1997 through 1999, a multi-page computer printout of all payments made for legal/union matters for the years 1997 through 1999, a multi-page computer printout of expenditures of the selectmen’s office for the years 1997 through 1999, including description of expenditure, invoice number, amount and check number. 

 

            4.  It is found that, at the time of the receipt of records described in paragraph 3, above, the respondent’s assistant informed the complainant’s spouse that, if after reviewing the computer printouts, the complainant wished further documentation of transactions, such documentation would be provided to him.   At the hearing in this matter, the complainant testified that such information was not conveyed to him.

 

            5.  It is found that, on June 6, 2000, the complainant appeared at the office of the respondent, contending that he did not receive the first selectman’s personal expenditures or expense account receipts for 1997 through 1999, and asking why check numbers were not included on the receipts issued to Linda Percoski.  It is further found that a heated discussion ensued. 

 

            6.  By letter filed with the Commission on June 23, 2000, the complainant alleged that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information [hereinafter “FOI”] Act by failing to promptly provide him with copies of all requested records.  At the hearing in this matter, the complainant acknowledged compliance with most of his request but alleged that the respondent had denied him access to documentation related to the personal expenditures of the first selectman.  The complainant further testified that he was willing to pay for any additional copies. 

 

            7.  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."

 

            8.  Section 1-212(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that:

 

"[a]ny person applying in writing shall receive, promptly upon request, a plain or certified copy of any public record.  The fee for any copy provided in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act…[b]y…[municipal] public agencies…shall not exceed fifty cents per page…."

 

9.  It is found that the term “personal expenditure” as used by the complainant in the request described in paragraph 2, above, and at the hearing in this matter, is subject to interpretation.  At the hearing, the respondent contended that he was willing to provide copies of any further documentation, such as receipts or canceled checks, which the complainant specifically requests. 

 

            10.  It is found that the respondent’s June 1, 2000, provision of copies, as described in paragraphs 3 and 4, above, constituted prompt and reasonable compliance with the complainant’s request as described in paragraph 2, above, within the meaning of §§1-210(a) and 1-212(a), G.S.  It is more specifically found that the respondent’s provision of a multi-page computer printout of expenditures of the selectmen’s office for the years 1997 through 1999, including description of expenditure, invoice number, amount and check number was responsive to the complainant’s request for copies of first selectman personal expenditures or expense account receipts for the years 1997 through 1999.

 

            11.  It is found that the pursuit of this complaint was the result of an unfortunate series of miscommunications.  

 

12.  Based upon the facts and circumstances of this case, it is concluded that the respondent did not violate the FOI Act, as alleged in the complaint.

 

 

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

 

            1.  The complaint is hereby dismissed.

 

            2.  The Commission encourages the parties to make use of the Commission’s ombudsman process in the future, as such process can often avoid the need to conduct costly and time-consuming administrative hearings. 

 

 

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of September 13, 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:

 

 

John Rose

176 Watchaug Road

Somers, CT  06071

 

 

Town Treasurer, Town of Somers

c/o Atty. Carl T. Landolina

Fahey, Landolina & Associates, LLC

487 Spring Street

Windsor Locks, CT  06096

 

 

 

 

__________________________

Melanie R. Balfour

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

 

FIC2000-319FD/mrb/09/18/00