FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        FINAL DECISION

 

Joseph T. Olesky,

 

                        Complainant

 

            against              Docket #FIC 90-404

 

Mayor of Enfield and Enfield Town Manager,

 

                        Respondents                 April 10, 1991

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on February 5, 1991, at which time the complainant and the respondent appeared 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.  By letter filed with this Commission on October 22, 1990, the complainant alleged that the respondents violated the FOI Act by failing to respond to his request for records dated September 25, 1990.

 

            3.  By letter dated September 25, 1990, the complainant requested a copy of the town's Fourth of July Celebration Committee's "certified audit."  He also requested, among other things, information concerning the man-hours expended by town employees on festival-related activities, the cost of such labor, and whether and by what percentage the town was reimbursed for such.  He also requested the total cost of alcohol purchased as well as the total income from the sale of alcohol.

 

            4.  It is found that by letter dated December 4, 1990, the respondent town manager, on behalf of himself and the mayor, provided the complainant with some of the information sought and informed the complainant that he would provide the independent audit report of the celebration committee when it became available at the end of that month.

 

            5.  It is found that at the time of hearing, the only documentation still in issue was a certified audit and cost information concerning alcohol purchased and income from the sale of alcohol.

 

Docket #FIC 90-404                           Page 2

 

            6.  It is found that the respondent town manager acted on behalf of himself and the mayor with respect to the request for records in this case, and that the mayor does not have access to any relevant records not otherwise available to the town manager.

 

            7.  It is found that the respondent town manager provided the financial statement to the complainant on January 11, 1991, approximately two days after the town manager received it from the celebration committee chairman.

 

            8.  It is found that the town manager accepted the financial statement from the celebration committee in lieu of a certified audit, which audit would cost approximately $10,000 to $15,000.

 

            9.  It is also found that the alcohol cost figures requested by the complainant are contained in the food and beverage figure of $65,257 reported as "expenses paid" in the provided financial statement.

 

            10.  It is also found that the respondents have no other documentation, other than that which was provided, with respect to the complainant's request.

 

            11.  At hearing the complainant insisted that a certified audit rather than a financial statement must be produced, and he also requested a finding by the FOI Commission that the celebration committee is a public agency.

 

            12.  It is concluded that a determination of whether a certified audit concerning the celebration committee is required is beyond the jurisdiction of this Commission.

 

            13.  It is also concluded that a finding concerning the status of the celebration committee is inappropriate in this case as the committee is not alleged to have denied the complainant access to any existing records.

 

            14.  Finally, it is concluded that under the facts of this case, there is no cause to grant relief to the complainant.

 

            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 April 10, 1991.

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

Docket #FIC 90-404                           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:

JOSEPH T. OLESKY

2 Thomas Street

Enfield, CT 06082

 

MAYOR OF ENFIELD

Town Hall

820 Enfield Street

Enfield, CT 06082

 

ENFIELD TOWN MANAGER

820 Enfield Street

Enfield, CT 06082

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission