FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by

FINAL DECISION

Steven Edelman,

 

Complainant

 

 

against

Docket #FIC 2001-048

Mark Solak, State’s Attorney, State
of Connecticut, Judicial District of Windham,

 

 

Respondent

April 25, 2001

 

 

 

 

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on March 20, 2001, at which time the complainant appeared and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  The respondent failed to appear.

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 January 4, 2001 to the respondent, the complainant requested to inspect “all October 16, 2000 appointment calendars, logs, schedules, and similar instrument[s] for all personnel in the Office of the Windham State’s Attorney.”  The complainant limited his request to those calendars, logs, schedules, and similar instruments that refer to Donald Schultz or Steven Edelman or matters relating to them.

 

3.      By letter dated January 26, 2001 and filed on January 30, 2001 the complainant appealed to this Commission alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act by denying him access to inspect the requested records.  The complainant requested that this Commission impose the maximum civil penalty against the respondent.

 

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 upon request during regular office or business hours. . . .

 

5.      It is found that the requested records are public records within the meaning of §1-210(a), G.S.

 

6.      It is found that after the complainant filed his complaint with this Commission, he received a letter dated January 26, 2001 from the respondent informing him that his January 4, 2001 letter had been reviewed and that he would receive an answer to his request two days after the secretary, who files and stores documents returned from vacation.

 

7.      It is found that the complainant made three requests on January 4, 2001 and that the respondent’s letter of January 26, 2001 did not indicate to which request it referred.

 

8.      Notwithstanding the respondent’s letter of January 26, 2001, it is found that as of the date of the hearing on this matter, the respondent had not made any further contact with the complainant regarding any of his requests.

 

9.      Consequently, it is concluded that the respondent violated the promptness provisions of §1-210(a), G.S., by his continued failure to comply with the complainant’s request.

 

10.  It is found that the violation described in paragraph 9, above, was 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 shall forthwith remit to the Commission a civil penalty in the amount of $25.00.

 

2.      The respondent shall forthwith provide the complainant with access to inspect the records described in paragraph 2 of the findings, above.

 

3.      Henceforth, the respondent shall strictly comply with the disclosure provisions of §1-210(a), G.S.

 

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of April 25, 2001.

 

 

_________________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

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:

 

Steven Edelman

Frog Pond

Windham Center, CT 06280

 

Mark Solak, State's Attorney,

State of Connecticut, Judicial

District of Windham

120 School Street

Danielson, CT 06239

 

 

______________________________

Petrea A. Jones

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

FIC/2001-048/FD/paj/05/02/2001