FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION |
|||
---|---|---|---|
In the Matter of a Complaint by | FINAL DECISION | ||
Franz Douskey, |
|||
Complainants | |||
against | Docket #FIC 1998-236 | ||
Town Planner, Planning and Zoning Office, Town of Hamden; and Planning and Zoning Office, Town of Hamden, |
|||
Respondents | December 9, 1998 |
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on October 27, 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. It is found that by letter dated July 19, 1998 the complainant asked the respondent town planner certain questions pertaining to the regulations for notifying residents of zoning changes.
3. It is also found that on August 5, 1998 the complainant visited the respondents office and at that time requested a copy of the July 29, 1998 Planning and Zoning commission meeting minutes (hereinafter minutes).
4. Having failed to receive a response to the July 19, 1998 request, and a copy of the minutes, the complainant appealed to the Commission by letter dated August 5, 1998 and filed on August 6, 1998, alleging that the respondents violated the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act.
5. With respect to the July 19, 1998 request described in paragraph 2, above, it is found that such request is not a request for records but rather a request for answers to questions.
6. It is found that the respondent town planner is not obligated under the FOI Act to answer questions, however, his obligation pursuant to §§1-15(a) and 1-19(a), G.S., is to provide the public with prompt access to inspect and to copy nonexempt public records.
7. With respect to the minutes request described in paragraph 3, above, it is found that at the time of the complainants visit to the respondent town planners office on August 5, 1998 a receptionist in the office had the minutes available, however, she denied the complainant a copy of such minutes.
8. It is found that the respondents later provided the complainant with a copy of the minutes approximately three to four days after the complainants August 5, 1998 visit to their office.
9. Section 1-19(a), G.S., provides in relevant part:
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 in accordance with the provisions of section 1-15. Any agency rule or regulation, or part thereof, that conflicts with the provisions of this subsection or diminishes or curtails in any way the rights granted by this subsection shall be void. [Emphasis added.]
10. It is concluded that the minutes are public records within the meaning §1-19(a), G.S.
11. It is found that the respondents provision of access to the minutes three to four days following the complainants August 5, 1998 visit to their office was not prompt within the meaning of §1-19(a), G.S.
12. It is therefore, concluded that the respondents violated §1-19(a), G.S., by failing to provide the complainant with prompt access to a copy of the minutes.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:
1. With respect to the minutes request, henceforth, the respondents shall strictly comply with the promptness provision of §1-19(a), G.S. The Commission also takes this opportunity to remind the respondents that in accordance with §1-21(a),G.S., minutes should be available for public inspection within seven days of the session to which they refer.
2. With respect to the July 19, 1998 request, the complaint is hereby dismissed.
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:
Franz Douskey 50 Ives Street Hamden, CT 06518-2202
Town Planner, Planning and Zoning Office, Town of Hamden; and Planning and Zoning Office, Town of Hamden c/o Atty. Joshua A. Winnick Hamden Town Attorney 2372 Whitney Avenue Hamden, CT 06518
__________________________ Melanie R. Balfour Acting Clerk of the Commission
FIC1998-236FD/mrb12141998