FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        FINAL DECISION

 

Barbara J. Coxum,

 

                                Complainant

 

                against                   Docket #FIC 94-85

 

Lillian D. Clayman, Mayor, Town of Hamden; Leslie Balch, Director

of Health, Quinnipiack Valley Health District; David Barboza, Housing

Code Enforcement Officer; and Maryellen P. Avery, Program Manager,

Hamden Office of Housing and Community Development,

 

                                Respondents                        February 8, 1995

 

                The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on July 28, 1994, 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.             By letter of complaint filed March 23, 1994, the complainant appealed to the Commission, alleging that her March 16, February 23 and March 14, 1994 requests for information from the respondents had been denied, and requesting that the Commission impose civil penalties against the respondents.

 

                3.             By additional letter of complaint filed March 23, 1994, the complainant again appealed to the Commission, alleging that her March 15, 1994 request for information from the respondent office of housing and community development had also been denied.

 

                4.             It is found that the complainant by letter dated February 23, 1994 requested from the respondent director of health a copy of any and all records on file as a result of a fire that occurred in 1975 at the complainant's property, as well as a copy of any policies and procedures for enforcing housing code violations in effect at the time as well as currently.

 

Docket #FIC 94-85                                               Page 2

 

                5.             It is found that the complainant by letter dated March 14, 1994 requested from the respondent housing code enforcement officer the opportunity to inspect and copy all records pertaining to a condemnation notice issued in 1975.

 

                6.             It is found that the complainant by letter dated March 16, 1994 requested from the respondent Mayor an opportunity to copy and inspect any information regarding a condemnation notice or proceeding by the Hamden health department concerning the condemnation notice.

 

                7.             It is found that the complainant by letter dated March 15, 1994 requested from the respondent office of housing and community development copies of any and all reports pertaining to her application for residential rehabilitation assistance.

 

                8.             It is found that the complainant applied for and was denied rehabilitation assistance for her property by the Hamden office of housing and community development.

 

                9.             It is found that the denial was based in part upon health code violations and a condemnation order issued in 1976 (when the property was damaged by fire while it was owned by someone else), some of which violations apparently remained uncorrected at the time of her rehabilitation assistance application.

 

                10.           It is found that the complainant sought records from the various respondents in connection with her efforts to obtain rehabilitation assistance.

 

                11.           It is also found that most of the disputes between the complainant and the various respondents concern issues of whether certain rehabilitation application procedures were performed correctly--for example, whether the property was inspected, and whether paperwork concerning the costs of repairing the property was or should have been completed.

 

                12.           With respect to the complaint against the respondent mayor, it is found that mayor's office has no records that are responsive to the complainant's request.

 

                13.           With respect to the complaint against the Quinnipiack Valley Health District, it is found that that respondent has no records that are responsive to the complainant's request (although some records may be archived with a predecessor agency, as that respondent informed the complainant).

 

                14.           With respect to the complaint against the housing code enforcement officer, it is found that that respondent promptly provided all documents in his custody that are responsive to the complainant's request.

 

Docket #FIC 94-85                                               Page 2

 

                15.           With respect to the complaint against the office of housing and community development, it is found that the complainant was promptly given an opporunity to inspect and copy all relevant records.

 

                16.           It is concluded that none of the respondents violated the Freedom of Information 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 dismissed.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of February 8, 1995.

 

                                                                             

                                                Debra L. Rembowski

                                                Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 94-85                                               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:

BARBARA J. COXUM

257 Goodrich Street

Hamden, CT 06517

 

LILLIAN D. CLAYMAN, MAYOR, TOWN OF HAMDEN

c/o Richard E. Gitlen, Esq.

Assistant Town Attoreny

2372 Whitney Avenue

Hamden, CT 06518

 

LESLIE BALCH, DIRECTOR OF HEALTH, QUINNIPIACK VALLEY HEALTH DISTRICT

1141 Dixwell Avenue

Hamden, CT 06514

 

DAVID BARBOZA, HOUSING CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER; AND MARYELLEN P. AVERY, PROGRAM MANAGER, HAMDEN OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

11 Pine Street

Hamden, CT 06514

 

                                                                             

                                                Debra L. Rembowski

                                                Clerk of the Commission