FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

 

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on June 7, 2011, at which time the complainant and the respondents 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 respondents are public agencies, within the meaning of §1-200(1), G.S.

 

2.  It is found that, by letter dated November 4, 2010, the complainant sent a request to the respondents for a copy of an “investigative report” prepared by Sergeant Scobie, in June of 2008, “centered around an alleged scandal involving…Erica Berg, Scott Swierd…and Michael Milici….”

 

3.  By letter of complaint, dated November 27, 2010 and filed December 1, 2010, the complainant appealed to this Commission, alleging that the respondents violated the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act by failing to comply with the request for records described in paragraph 2, above.  In her complaint, the complainant requested that a civil penalty be assessed against respondent Scobie.

 

4.  Section 1-200(5), G.S., provides:

 

“Public records or files” means any recorded data or information relating to the conduct of the public’s business prepared, owned, used, received or retained by a public agency, or to which a public agency is entitled to receive a copy by law or contract under section 1-218, whether such data or information be handwritten, typed, tape-recorded, printed, photostated, photographed or recorded by any other method.

 

5.  Section 1-210(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that:

 

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 (1) inspect such records promptly during regular office or business hours . . . (3) receive a copy of such records in accordance with section 1-212.

 

            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.  It is found that the respondents conducted a diligent search for any record responsive to the request described in paragraph 2, above.  It is further found that no such record was created or maintained by the respondents. 

 

8.  It is therefore concluded that the respondents did not violate the FOI Act as alleged in the complaint.

9.  Based upon the foregoing conclusion, the Commission need not consider the complainant’s request for civil penalties against the respondent Scobie.

 

 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 27,  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:

 

Misty Williams

225 Stony Creek Road

Branford, CT  06405

 

Bruce Scobie, Officer, Police Department,

Town of East Haven; and Police Department

Town of East Haven

c/o Hugh F. Keefe, Esq. and Benjamin D.  Gettinger, Esq.

Lynch, Traub, Keefe and Errante

52 Trumbull Street

P.O. Box 1612

New Haven, CT  06506-1612

 

 

 

 

 

____________________________

Cynthia A. Cannata

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

 

 

 

FIC/2010-747/FD/cac/8/1/2011