The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 25, 1998, 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(1), G.S.

	2.  By letter dated May 15, 1998, the complainant made a freedom of information 
request to the respondent superintendent for copies of:
 

a.  any and all correspondence  and information concerning the 
North Stonington Board of Education Pension Plan including 
all existing documents such as the summary plan description, 
checks sent to F&G Life Insurance Company with a breakdown 
of benefits paid for each eligible employee for the 1993 
through the 1997 fiscal years;
 

b.  documents sent to the statewide prosecution bureau by the 
Board of Education or its attorney;
 

c.  Mr. Blake’s teaching schedule for the school years between 
1993 and 1997 which was posted in the central office; and
d.  student records or report cards showing all course titles or 
subjects taught and grades received for each of Mr. Blakes 
students for the school years between 1993 and 1997.
 

	3.  By letter dated May 21, 1998, the respondent superintendent responded by 
denying the complainant’s request because:

a.  her request described in paragraphs 2a and 2b, above, was too 
broad and unless she could be more specific, additional 
information would not be provided;

b.  the superintendent’s office was not in possession of the 
requested schedule described in paragraph 2c, above;
 

c.  and her request described in 2d, above, would require research 
that he was not required to do and because the information 
revealed information that was exempt pursuant to §1-19(b)(11), 
G.S., and was also protected from disclosure under the federal 
privacy laws.

	4.  By letter dated June 15, 1998, and filed with this Commission on June 19, 
1998, the complainant appealed the respondents denial of her request.
 

	5.  Section 1-19(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that: 

Except as otherwise provided by any federal law or state 
statute, all records maintained or kept on file by any public 
agency, whether or not such records are required by any 
law or by any rule or regulation, shall be public records and 
every person shall have a right to inspect such records 
promptly during regular office or business hours or to 
receive a copy of such records promptly upon request in 
accordance with the provisions of section 1-15.

	6.  Section 1-15(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that:

Any person applying in writing shall receive, promptly 
upon request, a plain or certified copy of any public record.  

	7.  It is found that the records more fully described in paragraph 2, above, are 
public records within the meaning of §1-18a(5), G.S.
 

	8.  With respect to the complainant’s request described in paragraphs 2a and 2b, 
above, it is found that the complainant specifically identified the records she seeks and 
that while the request may be voluminous, it is not too broad.
 

	9.  It is therefore concluded that the respondents violated §§1-19a and 1-15, G.S., 
by failing to provided the complainant with the records described in paragraphs 2a and 
2b, above.
 

	10.  At the hearing on this matter, the respondent superintendent testified that he 
did not maintain the teaching schedule described in paragraph 2c, above and that he is not 
aware of any record that would be responsive to the complainant’s request.
 

	11.  It is therefore concluded that the respondents did not violate §§1-19(a) or 1-
15(a), G.S., by failing to provide the complainant with a copy of the schedule more fully 
described in paragraph 2c, above.
 

	12.  With respect to the complainant’s request in paragraph 2d, above, §1-
19(b)(11), G.S., provides in relevant part the “[n]othing in the Freedom of Information 
Act shall be construed to require disclosure of . . . names or addresses of students enrolled 
in any public school or college without the consent of each student . . . .”
 

	13.  Section 1-19(b)(17), G.S., also provides that an agency need not disclose 
educational records which are not subject to disclosure under the Family Educational 
Rights and Privacy Act, 20 USC 1232g.
 

	14.  It is therefore concluded that the complainant’s request in paragraph 2d, 
above, is exempt from disclosure under §1-19(b)(17), G.S. 
 

	15.  It is further found that the respondents failed to prove that the complainant’s 
request requires research.

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

	1.  The respondents shall forthwith provide the complainant with copies of the 
records described in paragraphs 2a and 2b, in the findings, above, free of charge.
 

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

	Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of 
December 9, 1998.

_________________________
Melanie R. Balfour
Acting Clerk of the Commission

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:

Karen Howard 
17 Puttker Road
North Stonington, CT 06359

Superintendent of Schools, 
North Stonington Public
Schools; and Board of 
Education, North Stonington 
Public Schools
c/o Atty. Robert J. Murphy
Sullivan, Schoen, Campane 
& Connon LLC
646 Prospect Avenue
Hartford, CT 06105-4286

__________________________
Melanie R. Balfour
Acting Clerk of the Commission

FIC1998-173FD/mrb12171998