FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        FINAL DECISION

 

Beth V. Denton,

 

                        Complainant

 

            against              Docket #FIC 90-378

 

West Haven Comptroller and Director of Finance and West Haven Public Affairs Director,

 

                        Respondents                 March 27, 1991

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on January 29, 1991, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  This case was consolidated for hearing with contested case docket numbers FIC 90-371 and FIC 90-502.

 

            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.  By letter filed with this Commission on October 4, 1990, the complainant alleged that on October 3, 1990, she was referred to the Public Affairs Director who had copies of her requests for access to monthly phone bills for the period of December 1989 through September 1990.  She further alleged that on October 4, 1990, the public affairs director denied her access to the phone records in violation of the FOI Act.

 

            3.  It is found that the comptroller and director of finance was on vacation on October 3, 1990, the date upon which the complainant appeared at city hall for the records she had requested.

 

            4.  It is also found that the complainant had been in contact with the comptroller and director of finance prior to that time, and that on September 27, 1990, he asked the complainant to return for the records after October 8, at which time he anticipated that the staff who could easily locate these records would be back from vacation.

 

            5.  It is found that the requested records are public records within the meaning of 1-18a(d), G.S.

 

Docket #FIC 90-378                           Page 2

 

            6.  It is found that on October 3, 1990, the public affairs director did not have the assembled package of information  sought by the complainant, although he was aware of the complainant's original request to the comptroller and director of finance.

 

            7.  It is also found that the public affairs director was called upon by the mayor to help with the copying and redacting of those copies of personal telephone call information including the time and numbers called, but not including the dollar amounts of the calls or the towns to which they were placed.

 

            8.  It is found that on October 11, 1990, the respondents provided the complainant with access to all the documents they could find that were responsive to the complainant's request.

 

            9.  It is concluded that the public affairs director acted reasonably in taking the time to consult with the mayor to  redact the telephone numbers, many of which were unlisted, of the mayor's fiancee, mother, and other family members and personal friends, prior to responding to the complainant's request.

 

            10.  It is concluded that under the facts of this case, the respondents did not violate the provisions of the FOI Act.

 

            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 March 27, 1991.

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 90-378                           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:

BETH V. DENTON

107 Second Avenue

West Haven, CT 06516

 

WEST HAVEN COMPTROLLER AND DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND WEST HAVEN PUBLIC AFFAIRS DIRECTOR

c/o Gerald P. Dwyer, Esq.

Corporation Counsel

355 Main Street

West Haven, CT 06516

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission