FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on April 17, 2006, 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.  It is found that, by letter dated February 11, 2005, the complainant requested that the respondent provide him with a copy of the complete investigation file related to allegations that he perpetrated criminal acts against his grandchildren [hereinafter “the requested records”]. 

 

3.  It is found that, under cover letter dated August 19, 2005, the respondent provided the complainant with portions of the requested records, but redacted many other portions of the requested records pursuant to §17a-28, G.S.  It is found that, upon receipt of such letter, the complainant requested that the respondent provide him with an unredacted version of the requested records, by letter dated August 25, 2005.  

 

4.  By letter dated and post-marked September 23, 2005, and therefore filed with the Commission on such date, the complainant alleged that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information [hereinafter “FOI”] Act, by denying him copies of the redacted portions of the requested records as described in paragraph 3, above.

 

5.  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.]

 

6.  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.” 

 

7.  The respondent contends that the requested records are exempt from mandatory disclosure by virtue of §17a-28, G.S.

 

8.  Section 17a-28(b), G.S., provides in relevant part:

 

“[n]otwithstanding the provisions of [the FOI Act], records maintained by the department [of Children and Families] shall be confidential and shall not be disclosed…..”

 

            9.  Additionally, the Commission notes that §17a-101k, G.S., provides in relevant part:

 

“…information contained in [child abuse] reports and any other information relative to child abuse, wherever located, shall be confidential….”

 

10.  At the hearing in this matter, the complainant contended that the confidentiality provisions cited herein only apply to children in the care and custody of the respondent, that his grandchildren are not in the respondent’s care and custody, and that therefore, such provisions should not apply. 

 

11.  However, the plain language of §§17a-28 and 17a-101k, G.S., does not limit confidentiality to records of children in the care and custody of the respondent.  

 

            12.  It is found that the redacted portions of the requested records at issue herein are not subject to mandatory disclosure under the FOI Act. 

 

13.  Accordingly, 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. 

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of July 12, 2006.

 

________________________________

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:

 

Robert McCloud

159 Mayflower Street

West Hartford, CT 06110-1421

 

Commissioner, State of Connecticut,

Department of Children and Families

c/o Donald Shevchuk, Esq.

Principal Attorney

Department of Children and Families

One Grove Street, 4^th floor

New Britain, CT 06053

 

 

___________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

 

FIC/2005-462FD/paj/7/12/2006