FREEDOM OF
INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF
CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of
a Complaint by FINAL
DECISION
Richard
Plaskonka,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 89-175
Philip Schnabel,
Police Chief, Rocky Hill Police Department and Lieutenant Dunn, Rocky Hill,
Police Department,
Respondents January 10, 1990
The above-captioned matter was heard
as a contested case on October 26, 1989, at which time the complainant and the
respondents 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(a),
G.S.
2.
On May 23, 1989, the complainant went to the Rocky Hill
Police
Department and made a request to inspect or copy the civilian complaint of
police misconduct in internal affairs case #IA89-06 (hereinafter the "IA
case").
3.
Having received a denial of his request, the complainant then appealed
to this Commission by letter of complaint dated May 23, 1989 and filed with the
Commission on May 25, 1989.
4.
Subsequent to the filing of the complaint in this matter, the
respondents on numerous occasions offered to provide the complainant with a
copy of the record requested and all other information compiled in connection
with the IA case investigation. On
October 26, 1989 the complainant accepted a copy of the respondents' IA case
file.
5.
The complainant contends that he did not receive prompt compliance with
his request as required by 1-19(a), G.S., and requests the imposition of a
civil penalty as provided in 1-21i(b), G.S.
Docket
#FIC89-175 Page 2
6.
The respondents contend that at the time of the complainant's request,
disclosure of the IA complaint might have compromised a police investigation
into suspected illegal drug activities.
The respondents contend that prior to the completion of their
investigation on June 26, 1989, the record requested by the complainant was
exempt from disclosure under 1-19(b)(3)(B) and 1-19(b)(3)(C), G.S.
8.
It is found that the requested record is a public record within the
meaning of 1-18a(d), G.S.
9.
It is found that the record requested by the complainant was severable
from the information subsequently compiled in connection with the investigation
of the IA case, and by itself would not have compromised the respondents' drug
investigation.
10.
It is found that the letter of complaint for the IA case sought by the
complainant did not fall within the permissive nondisclosure provisions of
1-19(b)(3), G.S.
11.
It is therefore concluded that the respondents violated 1-19(a),
G.S., by failing to provide the complainant with a copy of the requested record
promptly upon the complainant's request.
12.
As a matter of discretion, the Commission declines to impose a civil
penalty as requested by the complainant.
The following order by the
Commission is hereby recommended
on the basis of
the record concerning the above captioned complaint:
1.
Henceforth, the respondents shall comply strictly with the time
provisions for complying with requests for public records as set forth in
1-19(a), G.S.
2.
The complainant's motion to reopen the October 26, 1989 hearing is hereby
denied.
Approved by
order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of
January 10, 1990.
Tina C.
Frappier
Acting Clerk
of the Commission
Docket
#FIC89-175 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:
RICHARD
PLASKONKA
P.O. Box 4382
Hartford, CT
06146
PHILIP SCHNABEL,
POLICE CHIEF, ROCKY HILL POLICE DEPARTMENT
699 Old Main
Street
Rocky Hill, CT
06067
LIEUTENANT DUNN
ROCKY HILL
POLICE DEPARTMENT
699 Old Main
Street
Rocky Hill, CT
06067
Tina C.
Frappier
Acting Clerk
of the Commission