FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

FINAL DECISION
Docket #FIC 1996-302
January 22, 1997
In the Matter of a Complaint by Frank Faraci and Judy Pozzetti, Complainants
against
Middletown Office of the City Attorney, Respondent

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on November 20, 1996, at which time the complainants 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 1-18a(a), G.S.

2. By letter of complaint dated August 30, 1996 and filed with the Commission on September 3, 1996, the complainants alleged that the respondent failed to comply with the Commission’s order in contested cases docket #s FIC 95-160, Frank Faraci v. Middletown Office of the City Attorney and FIC 95-248, Judy Pozzetti v. Middletown Office of the City Attorney, (hereinafter FIC 95-160 and FIC 95-248), by redacting the date, the beginning and end times, the reason and the case number from Frank Violissi’s overtime reports, (hereinafter "requested records"). The complainants request that the Commission impose a civil penalty in this matter.

3. The Commission takes administrative notice of the record and decisions in FIC 95-160 and FIC 95-248.

4. The requested records were previously inspected in camera by the Commission in FIC 95-160 and FIC 95-248.

5. In FIC 95-160 and FIC 95-248, the Commission ordered that the respondent may redact " the identity of informants and witnesses not otherwise known, and investigatory techniques not otherwise known within the meaning of 1-19(b)(3)(A) and (D), G.S."

6. It is found that the respondent redacted the date, beginning and end times, reason and case number from Violissi’s overtime reports prior to providing the complainants with a copy of such reports.

7. It is concluded that the respondent violated the Commission’s order in FIC 95-160 and 95-248 when it redacted the date, beginning and end times, and case number from Violissi’s overtime reports.

8. It is further concluded that the respondent did not violate the Commission’s order in FIC 95-160 and 95-248 to the extent that it redacted from the overtime reports the names of informants and/or witnesses, and the descriptions of specific investigatory techniques not otherwise known to the general public.

9. The Commission in its discretion declines to impose a civil penalty in this matter.

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 provide the complainant with copies of the overtime reports with only the names of informants and/or witnesses, and the descriptions of specific investigatory techniques not otherwise known to the general public redacted.

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of January 22, 1997.

__________________________
Elizabeth A. Leifert
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:

Frank Faraci and Judy Pozzetti
c/o Ralph E. Wilson, Esq.
137 South Main Street
Middletown, CT 06457

Middletown Office of the City Attorney
c/o Timothy P. Lynch, Esq.
Office of the City Attorney
P.O. Box 1300
Middletown, CT 06457-1300

__________________________
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the Commission
FIC1996-302/FD/eal/01291997