FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        FINAL DECISION

 

Walter A. Czaja, Jr. and Haddam

Taxpayer's Association, Inc.,

 

                                Complainants

 

                against                   Docket #FIC 94-72

 

Charles F. Sweetman, Superintendent, Regional School

District No. 17; Robert A. Norton, Jr., Chairman, Regional

School District No. 17 Board of Education and Gary J. Shettle,

Director of Finance and Operations, Regional School District No. 17,

 

                                Respondents                        February 22, 1995

 

                The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 1 and 15, 1994, at which time the complainants and the respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  This case was consolidated for hearing with Docket #FIC 94-45, Elizabeth Allen against Charles F. Sweetman, Superintendent of Schools, Regional School District No. 17 and Gary Shettle, Director of Finance and Operations, Regional School District No. 17; and Docket #FIC 94-59, Lawrence G. Stankus and Haddam Taxpayer's Association, Inc. against Charles F. Sweetman, Superintendent, Regional School District No. 17; Robert A. Norton, Jr., Chairman,Regional School District No. 17 Board of Education and Gary J. Shettle, Director of Finance and Operations, Regional School District No. 17.

 

                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 7, 1994, the complainants appealed to the Commission, alleging that their February 24, 1994 request for records had been denied and that they had been required to make an appointment; and requesting the imposition of civil penalties against the respondents.

 

                3.             It is found that the complainants on February 23, 1994 visited the offices of the respondents and submitted a written requested to view and have copies of the following documents:

 

                                a.             "The contract between D[istrict]-17 and the refuse hauler for the 1993-94 fiscal year;"

 

Docket #FIC 94-72                                               Page 2

 

                                b.             "The Invitation to Bid Notice for the above-mentioned Contract;"

 

                                c.             "All responses to the invitation to bid above;"

 

                                d.             "All the invoices pertaining to paper products, i.e., paper towels, napkins, toilet tissue, soaps, powders, and miscellaneous cleaning supplies and equipment;" and

 

                                e.             "The Citizens Committee Report on the study of the privatization of the bus transportation system versus the present district operated system."

 

                4.             It is found that the requested records are public records within the meaning of 1-18a(d) and 1-19(a), G.S.

 

                5.             It is found that the respondents initially informed the complainant Czaja that they didn't know when the documents would be available.

 

                6.             It is found that the complainant Czaja returned to the respondents' offices on March 2, 1994, at which time he was told that some 240 pages had been copied for him, and that he should periodically check with the respondents' secretary to find out when the copying was completed and make an appointment when it was.

 

                7.             It is found that the respondents by letter dated March 4, 1994 informed the complainants that the requested records were available.

 

                8.             It is found that the complainant Czaja some time later returned to the respondents' offices and viewed the records that had been copied for him.

 

                9.             The complainants maintain that the respondents did not fully comply with their request, because they were shown only copies of documents, not the originals from which the copies were made.

 

                10.           It is concluded that the respondents technically violated 1-19(a), G.S., by not giving the complainants an opportunity to view the original records from which the copies were made.

 

                11.           It is also found, however, that there was no evidence to suggest that the copies provided to the complainants were in any way deficient, that copies of any documents had been withheld from the complainants, that the complainants had been

 

Docket #FIC 94-72                                               Page 3

 

required to purchase the copies as a condition to viewing them, or that the complainants had been in any way harmed by viewing copies instead of originals, notwithstanding their suspicions that other unidentified documents had been withheld from them.

 

                12.           At the hearing on this matter, the respondents requested that sanctions be imposed against the complainants for their failure to promptly pick up and pay for the copies that had been made for them.

 

                13.           The Commission in its discretion declines to impose civil penalties against the complainants.

 

                14.           The Commission notes that 1-15(c), G.S., permits the respondents to require prepayment for copies if the fee is estimated to be ten dollars or more.

 

                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 strictly comply with the requirements of 1-19(a), concerning the inspection of public records.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of February 22, 1995.

 

                                                                             

                                                Debra L. Rembowski

                                                Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 94-72                                               Page 4

 

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:

WALTER A. CZAJA, JR. AND HADDAM TAXPAYER'S ASSOCIATION, INC.

P.O. Box 28

Hignum, CT 06441

 

CHARLES F. SWEETMAN, SUPERINTENDENT, REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 17; ROBERT A. NORTON, JR., CHAIRMAN, REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 17 BOARD OF EDUCATION AND GARY J. SHETTLE, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND OPERATIONS, REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 17

P.O. Box 568

Little City Road

Higganum, CT 06441

 

                                                                             

                                                Debra L. Rembowski

                                                Clerk of the Commission