FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

                                                

The above-captioned matter was scheduled for hearing as a contested case on March 7, 2011, at which time both the complainant and the respondents appeared and presented testimony and exhibits on the complaint. The respondents agreed to meet with the complainant, prior to a continued hearing, in order to review his request for records relating to the 2008 reevaluation of his property at 158 Seaview Avenue, Bridgeport.

 

A continued hearing was held on April 4, 2011, at which the respondent Tax Assessor testified. She stated that Vision Appraisal Technology performed a computer assisted mass appraisal of 35,000 parcels in Bridgeport for the 2008 reevaluation. Following the completion of the reevaluation in February 2009, Vision Appraisal Technology returned all related paper records to her office in approximately ten long banker boxes. Following the March 7, 2011 hearing, three staff members from the respondent Office of the Tax Assessor spent three days searching the banker boxes which had been returned without any proper filing system. The requested records, with handwritten notations by Vision Appraisal Technology personnel, were delivered to the complainant when he met with the respondents in March 2011. The respondent Tax Assessor testified that, to the best of her knowledge and belief, the records given to the complainant at their meeting constituted all records used by her office to evaluate the complainant’s property in 2008.

 

Based upon receipt of the additional records and the representations of the respondent Tax Assessor, the complainant stated that he wished to withdraw his complaint.

 

The Commission takes administrative notice of the complainant’s withdrawal and recommends the following orders on the basis of the record:

 

1.      Based on the withdrawal of the complaint, the case is hereby dismissed.

 

2.  The Commission warmly commends the parties on having reached a settlement in this matter without full adjudication.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of June 22,  2011.

 

 

__________________________

Cynthia A. Cannata

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 Percell

158 Seaview Avenue

Bridgeport, CT  06607

 

Elaine Carvalho, Tax Assessor, City of Bridgeport; and

Office of the Tax Assessor, City of Bridgeport

c/o Gregory Conte, Esq.

Assistant City Attorney

City of Bridgeport

999 Broad Street, 2^nd Floor

Bridgeport, CT  06604

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

____________________________

Cynthia A. Cannata

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

 

 

 

FIC/2010-606/FD/cac/6/23/2011