FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION
William H. Daley and The Middletown Press,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 90-40
Middletown Police Department,
Respondent January 23, 1991
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on May 18, 1990, at which time the complainants and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.
On June 6, 1990, the respondent provided the records for in camera inspection.
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. By letter of complaint dated January 31, 1990, the complainants alleged that the respondent denied them access to records pertaining to a completed disciplinary proceeding against Patrolman William Clayton.
3. The respondent claimed that it would not provide the records because Patrolman Clayton objected to their disclosure pursuant to 1-20a(b), G.S.
4. It is found that the complainants requested copies of records pertaining to the completed disciplinary investigation of Patrolman William Clayton on January 4, 1990.
5. It is found that Patrolman Clayton objected to disclosure of the files on the ground that disclosure would constitute an invasion of his personal privacy.
6. It is found that the respondent denied the complainants' request on January 12, 1990.
Docket #FIC 90-40 Page Two
7. It is found that the requested record is a personnel or similar file within the meaning of 1-19(b)(2), G.S.
8. It is found that the public has a legitimate interest in the performance of police officers.
9. It is concluded that by accepting the position of a police officer William Clayton waived any privacy rights which he may have had in records concerning his performance.
10. It is concluded even if William Clayton has not waived his privacy rights by accepting the position of a police officer, that the legitimate public interest in disclosure of the records of the disciplinary proceeding outweighs Clayton's privacy interests in the evaluation.
11. It is found that disclosure of information pertaining to third parties which is contained in the requested records would not constitute an invasion of personal privacy.
12. It is therefore concluded that the requested records are not exempt from disclosure pursuant to 1-19(b)(2), G.S.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint.
1. The respondent shall provide the complainants with copies of the requested investigation within two weeks of the date of mailing the final decision in this case.
2. In complying with paragraph one of the order, above, the names of or any other information identifying third parties may be redacted by the respondent.
Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of January 23, 1991.
Tina C. Frappier
Acting Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC 90-40 Page Three
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:
WILLIAM H. DALEY AND THE MIDDLETOWN PRESS
2 Main Street
P.O. Box 471
Middletown, CT 06457
MIDDLETOWN POLICE DEPARTMENT
c/o Russ Lehman, Esq.
City Attorney's Office
DeKoven Drive
Middletown, CT 06457
Tina C. Frappier
Acting Clerk of the Commission