FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION

 

David E. Blum,

 

Complainant, Docket #FIC 86 - 292

 

against January 14, 1987

 

Office of Contract Compliance Coordinator, State of Connecticut Department of Transportation

 

Respondent

 

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on November 13, 1986, 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:

 

1. The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

2. On October 22, 1986, the complainant requested the respondent provide the following documents:

 

a. names, addresses and all other public

information on Women's Business Enterprises (WBE's), Minority Business Enterprises (MBE's) and Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE's) certified during 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983 and 1984;

 

b. names, addresses and all other public

information on WBE's, MBE's and DBE's decertified or denied recertification in 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983 and 1984, including any cases where hearings were held or appeals were filed;

 

c. all administrative memoranda, public

standards, guidelines and communications on the matters described in paragraphs 2a and b, above;

 

Docket #FIC 86-292 Page Two

 

d. and correspondence with the federal

Department of Transportation on WBE, MBE or DBE certifications, standards for certification under 49 CFR 23, and state programs under 49 CFR 23.

 

3. The complainant appealed to the Commission by letter of complaint dated and filed with the Commission on October 22, 1986, alleging that the respondent only partially fulfilled his request, in violation of 1-15 and 1-19(a), G.S.

 

4. After the hearing the respondent filed an affidavit with the Commission stating it provided the complainant with all the requested documents that actually exist within the respondent's custody.

 

5. It is found that the respondent has made a good faith effort to fulfill the complainant's request and provided all the requested documents existing within its custody.

 

6. It is concluded, therefore, that the respondent did not violate 1-15 and 1-19(a), G.S.

 

7. It is further found that the complainant's conduct at the hearing on this matter totally lacked respect for the civilized adjudication of disputes and is unacceptable.

 

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.

 

2. The Commission cautions the complainant that it will not tolerate conduct like that which he exhibited at the hearing on this matter. Such conduct at future Commission proceedings may lead to the imposition of appropriate sanctions against him.

 

Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of January 14, 1987

 

Catherine I. Hostetter

Acting Clerk of the Commission