FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by

FINAL DECISION

David Carr,

 

Complainant

 

 

against

 Docket #FIC 2000-364

Superintendent of Schools, Bridgeport
Public Schools

 

 

Respondents

September 27, 2000

 

 

 

 

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 15, 2000, at which time the complainant appeared, and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  The respondent failed to appear.  The case caption was modified on August 24, 2000, following receipt of a request from the President of the Bridgeport Education Association to remove its name as a party complainant in this matter.

           

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 June 29, 2000, the complainant requested that the respondent provide him with a copy of the “Asbestos Removal Plan” (hereinafter “plan”).

 

3.  Having failed to receive a response or the plan, the complainant, by letter dated July 11, 2000 and filed with the Commission on July 13, 2000, appealed to the Commission, alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act by denying him a copy of the plan.

 

            4.  It is not clear from the record whether the plan exists because the respondent failed to appear at the hearing in this matter in spite of the fact that the Commission’s notice of hearing was sent and received, as indicated by a signed return receipt.  The complainant contends that such a plan is required by federal and state law and should exist.  He contends further, that he believes the plan exists and is being withheld from him.

 

            5. Section 1-210(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, 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.  Any agency rule or regulation, or part thereof, that conflicts with the provisions of this subsection or diminishes or curtails in any way the rights granted by this subsection shall be void.  [Emphasis added.]

 

            6.  It is concluded that if the plan exists, then it is a “public record” within the meaning of §1-210(a), G.S., and the complainant is entitled to it.

 

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

            1.  Forthwith, the respondent shall provide the complainant with a copy of the plan, if it exists.

 

            2.  If no plan exists, the respondent shall so attest in an affidavit, such affidavit to be signed by the respondent and provided to the complainant within seven (7) days of the issuing of the notice of final decision in this matter.

 

            3.  The respondent’s failure to respond to the complainant’s request and further failure to appear at the hearing in this matter suggests a willful and total lack of disregard not only for the complainant’s rights and the respondent’s responsibilities under the Freedom of Information Act, but also for this Commission.

 

            4.  The Commission may wish to consider whether a civil penalty is warranted in this case and convene a further hearing, pursuant to §1-206(b)(2), G.S., which provides, in relevant part:

 

upon the finding that a denial of any right created by the Freedom of Information Act was without reasonable grounds and after the custodian or other official directly responsible for the denial has been given an opportunity to be heard at a hearing conducted in accordance with sections 4-176e to 4-184, inclusive, the commission may, in its discretion, impose against the custodian or other official a civil penalty of not less than twenty dollars nor more than one thousand dollars.

                                                                       

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of September 27, 2000.

 

 

_________________________

Ann B. Gimmartino

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 Carr

PO Box 945

New Milford, CT  06776

 

Superintendent of Schools,

Bridgeport Public Schools

45 Lyons Terrace

Bridgeport, CT  06604

 

 

 

 

__________________________

Ann B. Gimmartino

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

 

FIC2000-364FD/mes/10/05/2000