FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

FINAL DECISION
Docket #FIC 1996-418
July 30, 1997

In the Matter of a Complaint by Frank J. Rizzitelli, Complainant
against
Chief of Police, Fairfield Police Department  Respondent

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on January 27, 1996, at which time the complainant and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint. The respondent’s motion to dismiss filed with the Commission on January 23, 1997 is denied.

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. It is found that by letters dated July 1, August 5 and 19, 1996, the complainant requested that the respondent provide him with the arrest incident report pertaining to Grant Dalling in connection with a May 9, 1992 incident at the Sidetrack restaurant, Post Road, Fairfield (hereinafter "requested arrest incident report"). In his July 1, 1996 letter, the complainant also requested information on himself, however, at the hearing on this matter, the complainant limited his appeal to the requested arrest incident report.

3. It is found that by letters dated July 17, 29 and August 7, 1996, the respondent acknowledged receipt of the complainant’s request, and offered to provide access to the requested records. The respondent in his July 29, 1996 response informed the complainant that the requested records were available at the police department’s records division ("records division").

4. It is found that the complainant visited the records division on August 3, 1996 and picked up the records that the respondent had made available to him.

5. By letter dated and filed with the Commission on August 26, 1996, the complainant appealed to the Commission alleging that the respondent violated the

Docket #FIC 1996-418 Page 2

Freedom of Information ("FOI") Act by denying him access to the requested arrest incident report.

6. The respondent contends that the requested arrest incident report was provided to the complainant among the records described in paragraph 4 of the findings, above.

7. The complainant contends that the requested arrest incident report was missing from the records made available to him by the respondent and that he has not yet received a copy of the subject report.

8. It is found that there is some confusion over whether the complainant has already been provided with a copy of the requested arrest incident report.

9. Nevertheless, it is found that the complainant does not have a copy of the requested report and that the respondent is willing to provide him with one.

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 a copy of the requested arrest incident report more fully described in paragraph 2 of the findings, above.

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its special meeting of July 30, 1997.

__________________________
Doris V. Luetjen
Acting Clerk of the Commission

Docket #FIC1996-418 Page 3

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 J. Rizzitelli
160 Country Road
Fairfield, CT 06430

Chief of Police, Fairfield Police Department
c/o Tracey C. Kammerer, Esq.
Marsh, Day & Calhoun
2507 Post Raod
Southport, CT 06490-1259

__________________________
Doris V. Luetjen
Acting Clerk of the Commission
FIC 1996-418/FD/beh/08141997