FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

FINAL DECISION
Docket #FIC 1997-035
October 8, 1997

In the Matter of a Complaint by Charles Peterson, Complainant
against
Karen Buffkin, Assistant Corporation Counsel, City of Hartford; and City of Hartford, Respondents

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on July 18, 1997 at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint. Docket #FIC 1996-036, Charles Peterson v. Patricia Washington, Personnel Director City of Hartford and City of Hartford ("FIC1997-036"), was consolidated with the above-captioned matter for purpose of hearing.

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 1-18a(a), G.S.

2. It is found that by letter dated November 13, 1996, the complainant requested that the Director of Personnel of the City of Hartford ("Director of Personnel") permit him to inspect all test results for the 1993/1994 promotional lieutenants examination ("examination").

3. It is found that the respondent counsel by letter dated November 19, 1996, informed the complainant that his request was being reviewed and that he would be contacted shortly.

4. It is found that approximately three to four weeks following the respondent counsel’s November 19, 1996 letter, the complainant and the respondent counsel discussed the request, and at that time, in response to the respondent counsel’s request for a more specific explanation of the records being sought, the complainant requested the following records:

a. the oral board panel’s scoring sheets containing the individual scores of candidates;

b. the written answers of candidates; and

c. the taped oral interviews conducted with candidates.

5. Having failed to receive the records described in paragraph 4 of the findings, above, the complainant, by letter dated January 11, 1997 and filed on January 17, 1997, alleged that the respondent counsel violated the Freedom of Information Act by denying him access to such records. The complainant requested the imposition of a civil penalty upon the respondents.

6. It is found that the respondent city’s director of personnel is the custodian of the records at issue in this case and the official to whom the complainant made his requests.

7. It is therefore, concluded that the respondent counsel is not a proper party to this appeal but was apparently so named based upon the complainant’s representation in his letter of appeal to the Commission, described in paragraph 5 of the findings, above.

8. In light of the complaint in FIC 1997-036, the Commission declines to take jurisdiction over the respondent city 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 complaint is dismissed.

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of October 8, 1997.

______________________
Doris V. Luetjen
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:
Charles Peterson
136 Wheeler Road
Wethersfield, CT 06109

Karen Buffkin, Assistant Corporation Counsel, City of Hartford; and City of Hartford
c/o Ivan A. Ramos
Special Counsel
550 Main Street
Hartford, CT 06103

__________________________
Doris V. Luetjen
Acting Clerk of the Commission
FIC1997-035/tcg/10081997