FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by FINAL DECISION
Alex F. Carrozelli,
Complainant
against Docket
#FIC 94-91
Director, Bridgeport Office
of Labor Relations,
Respondent February 24, 1995
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested
case on July 14, 1994, at which time the complainant and the respondent
appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and
argument on the complaint. This case
was consolidated for hearing with FIC 94-70, Alex F. Carozzelli against Mayor,
City of Bridgeport; Bridgeport City Attorney; Bridgeport Finance Department;
Bridgeport Office of Policy and Management; Bridgeport Common Council; and City
of Bridgeport; and FIC 94-177, Alex F.
Carozzelli against Acting Director, Bridgeport Office of Policy and Management.
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 filed March 24, 1994, the complainant appealed to the
Commission, alleging that the respondent failed to respond to his March 10,
1994 request for certain records.
3. It
is found that the complainant by letter dated March 10, 1994 requested the
resume and job application for fifteen certain city employees; the current
wages of those employees; the 1992 wages of the eight employees who were then
employed by the city; and the names of any of the identified fifteen employees
who performed any degree of work relative to the city's workers compensation
program.
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 respondent provided certain records in response to the
complainant's March 10 request on May 23, 1994.
Docket #FIC 94-91 Page
2
6. The
complainant maintains that the records provided to him are incomplete.
7. It
is found, however, that the respondent fully complied with the complainant's
request, aside from the personnel records described below.
8. The
Commission notes that the complainant is free to make further requests for any
identifiable documents that he believes he still does not have.
9. It
is also found, however, that the records that were provided were not provided
promptly within the meaning of 1-15(a) and 1-19(a), G.S.
10. It
is therefore concluded that the respondent violated 1-15(a) and
1-19(a) by failing to provide copies of public records promptly upon request.
11. It
is found that the records provided were responsive to all but the complainant's
request for job applications and resumes, because the respondent believed that
those documents contained confidential information such as social security
numbers, birthdates, next of kin, and home addresses and telephone numbers.
12. The
respondent maintains that the requested job applications and resumes are exempt
from disclosure pursuant to 1-19(b)(2), G.S.
13. Section
1-19(b)(2), G.S., provides that nothing in the Freedom of Information
("FOI") Act requires disclosure of "personnel or medical files
and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute an invasion of
personal privacy ...."
14. It
is found that the requested job applications and resumes are personnel or
similar files within the meaning of 1-19(b)(2), G.S.
15. It
is also found, however, that the respondent failed to prove that disclosure of
anything in those files, with the possible exception of the information
identified in paragraph 11, above, would constitute an invasion of personal
privacy.
16. It
is therefore concluded that the respondent violated 1-19(b)(2), G.S., by
failing to provide the requested job applications and resumes with any private
information deleted.
The following order by the Commission is hereby
recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned
complaint:
Docket #FIC 94-91 Page
3
1. The
respondent shall forthwith provide to the complainant copies of the requested
job applications and resumes. In
complying with this order, the respondent may delete any information identified
in paragraph 11 of the findings, above.
2. Henceforth
the respondent shall strictly comply with the requirements of 1-15(a)
and 1-19(a), G.S.
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 94-91 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:
ALEX F. CARROZELLI
16 Richards Lane
Norwalk, CT 06851
DIRECTOR, BRIDGEPORT OFFICE
OF LABOR RELATIONS,
c/o John H. Barton, Esq.
Office of the City Attorney
202 State Street
Bridgeport, CT 06604
Debra L. Rembowski
Clerk of the Commission