FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by CORRECTED FINAL DECISION
Joan C. Molloy,
Complainants
against Docket #FIC 1998-156
Wallingford Conservation Commission,
Town of Wallingford; and Town of
Wallingford,
Respondents October 28, 1998
	The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 27, 1998, 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 and 
conclusions of law are reached:

	1.  The respondents are public agencies within the meaning of 1-18a(1), G.S.
	 2.  By letter dated May 7, 1998, the complainant submitted a written request to 
the chairman of the respondent commission for a copy of the list of the properties and 
their ranking (hereinafter “the list”) compiled by the respondent commission for the 
Town of Wallingford’s open space acquisition project (hereinafter “the project”).
	 3.  By letter dated May 28, 1998, the town attorney informed the complainant 
that the list was exempt from disclosure pursuant to 1-19(b)(7), G.S., because the 
properties on the list were still being evaluated and the respondent town had not 
abandoned its interest in acquiring properties on the list.  
	4.  By letter dated May 28, 1998, and filed with the Commission on June 1, 1998, 
the complainant appealed the respondent commission’s refusal to provide her with a copy 
of the requested list.  
 
	 5.  Section 1-19(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 . . . shall be public records and every person shall 
have the right . . . to receive a copy of such records in 
accordance with the provisions of section 1-15.
 	6.  Section 1-15(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that:
 
Any person applying in writing shall receive, promptly 
upon request, a plain or certified copy of any public record.
 	7.  It is found that the list more fully described in paragraph 2, above, is a public 
record within the meaning of 1-18a(5), G.S.  
 
 	8.  With respect to the respondent’s claim of exemption described in paragraph 3, 
above, 1-19(b)(7), G.S., provides in relevant part that: 
Nothing in the Freedom of Information Act shall be 
construed to require the disclosure of . . . the 
contents of real estate appraisals, engineering or 
feasibility estimates and evaluations made for or by 
an agency relative to the acquisition of property . . . 
until such time as all property has been acquired or 
all proceedings or transactions have been terminated 
or abandoned . . . 
 	9.  It is found that the list is an inventory of parcels of property in the town of 
Wallingford and that each parcel has been evaluated for and ranked according to its 
potential for open space acquisition. 
 
	10.  It is found that the list was complied by the respondent commission for use by 
the town council to assist the town council in its selection of sites to pursue 
and acquire for the project.  
 
	11.  It is found that the list is an evaluation made for or by an agency relative to the 
acquisition of property.
 
	12.  It is further found that although the town council failed in an earlier attempt to 
acquire property on the list, it has not abandoned its intention or efforts to acquire other 
property on the list.  
 
	13.  It is found, therefore, that the proceedings or transactions relative to the 
acquisition of the property have not been terminated or abandoned.
 
	14.  Therefore, it is concluded that the list is permissibly exempt from disclosure 
pursuant to 1-19(b)(7), G.S.
 
	15.  It is further concluded that the respondents did not violate 1-15(a) or 1-
19(a), G.S., by failing to provide the complainant with a copy of the list.  
 
	16.   At the hearing on this matter the respondents further argued that the list was 
exempt pursuant to 1-19(b)(1), G.S.
 
	17.  Given the conclusion reached in paragraph 15, above, it is unnecessary to rule 
on the claimed exemption in paragraph 17, above.
	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 
October 28, 1998.

_________________________
Melanie R. Balfour
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:
Joan C. Molloy
150 South Street
Wallingford, CT 06492
Wallingford Conservation
Commission, Town of 
Wallingford; and Town of 
Wallingford
c/o Atty. Janis M. Small
Town Attorney
Town of Wallingford
45 South Street
Wallingford, CT 06492


__________________________
Melanie R. Balfour
Acting Clerk of the Commission


FIC1998-156CFD/mrb11091998