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