FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by Final Decision

George Brey and AFSCME Local 1565,

Complainants

against Docket #FIC 95-32

Director, Region II, State of Connecticut, Department of Correction,

Respondent November 8, 1995

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on September 13, 1995, at which time the complainants and the respondent 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 a public agencies within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

2. By letters dated November 19, 1994 and January 17, 1995, the complainants requested that the respondent provide them with:

"1) Copies of the N[orth] E[ast] C[orrectional] C[enter] quarterly summaries (MVCU 12) for the fiscal year that ended June 30, 1994 which your agency is required to provide the Office of State Fleet Operations.

2) Access to ALL N.E.C.C. NP-4 members 'Proof of Insurances' on file with your agency for the fiscal year that ended on June 30, 1994. Please include date of receipt.

3) Access of ALL N.E.C.C. NP-4 members paid mileage reimbursements for the fiscal year that ended June 30, 1994.

4) Access to ALL paid mileage reimbursements for the fiscal year that ended June 30, 1994."

#FIC 95-32 Page 2

3. By letter of complaint dated February 1, 1995, and filed on February 8, 1995, the complainants appealed to the Commission and alleged that the respondent failed to comply with their request for access to and copies of certain documents.

4. It is found that the records responsive to the complainant's request are public records within the meaning of 1-18a(d) and 1-19(a), G.S.

5. It is found that the respondent did not initially comprehend certain portions of the complainants' requests but that the respondent's personnel director eventually sought and received clarification of the complainants' requests by speaking with complainant Brey on February 7, 1995.

6. It is found that by letter dated February 7, 1995, the respondent invited the complainants to the respondent's office to inspect the records responsive to the complainants' requests, as specified in paragraphs 2-1, 2-3 and 2-4, above.

7. With respect to the complainants' request identified in paragraph 2-2, above, the respondent indicated in its letter that it was not willing to make such records available to the complainants absent a release from each employee concerned.

8. At the hearing in this matter, the complainants withdrew that portion of their request identified in paragraph 2-2, above.

9. It is found that although the complainant had requested copies of the records identified in paragraph 2-1, above, the respondent only offered to provide the complainants' with access to inspect such records in its February 7, 1995 letter described in paragraph 6, above.

10. At the hearing in this matter, the respondent agreed to provide the complainants with copies of the records identified in paragraph 2-1, above.

11. It is found that the respondent failed to promptly provide the complainants with copies of the records identified in paragraph 2-1, above, and it is therefore concluded that the respondent violated the provisions of 1-15(a) and 1-19(a), G.S., with respect thereto.

#FIC 95-32 Page 3

12. It is found that the records requested in paragraphs 2-3 and 2-4, above, have been available for inspection by the complainants since February 7, 1995, but that the complainants have never availed themselves of the opportunity to inspect them, since a portion of their request had been denied.

13. It is found that although the respondent ultimately provided the complainants with access to the records requested in paragraphs 2-3 and 2-4, above, such access under the facts of this case was not prompt; and it is therefore concluded that the respondent violated the provisions of 1-19(a), G.S., with respect thereto.

The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:

1. The respondent shall forthwith provide the complainants with copies of the N.E.C.C. quarterly summaries, as described in paragraph 3-1, above, free of charge.

2. Henceforth, the respondent shall strictly comply with the requirements of 1-15(a) and 1-19(a), G.S.

3. The Commission urges the parties to continue the communication and cooperation demonstrated at the hearing in this matter in an effort to amicably resolve potential future complaints.

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

Elizabeth A. Leifert

Acting Clerk of the Commission

Docket #FIC 95-32 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:

George Brey and AFSCME Local 1565

544 Main Street, Rte. 99

Cromwell, CT 06416

Director, Region II, State of Connecticut, Department of Correction

c/o Richard Biggar, Esq.

Office of Attorney General

110 Sherman Street

Hartford, CT 06105

Elizabeth A. Leifert

Acting Clerk of the Commission