FIC1999-256

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by			FINAL DECISION
Wanda Z. Franek,
		Complainants
	against		Docket #FIC 1999-256
Executive Director, East Hartford Housing Authority, Town of East Hartford; and East Hartford Housing Authority, Town of East Hartford,
		Respondents	November 10, 1999

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on July 28, 1999 at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint. The case caption was amended to change “City of East Hartford” to “Town of East Hartford”.

1. The respondents are public agencies within the meaning of §1-200(1), G.S., (formerly §1-18a(1), G.S.).

2. It is found that by letter dated April 30, 1999, and hand-delivered on May 5, 1999, the complainant, a member of the respondent authority, requested that the respondent executive director provide her with:

[c]opies of the East Hartford Housing Authority credit cards expenditures. Annotation of any/all travel expenditures or obligations since January 1, 1999, for any commissioner - employee of the respondent authority, including the location and reason for the trip, this should include all expenditure accounts including section 8.

3. It is found that by letter dated May 10, 1999, the respondent executive director provided the complainant with a copy of certain credit card statements.

4. It is found that by letter dated May 18, 1999, the complainant informed the respondent executive director that the records provided were incomplete, and that she wanted:

credit card expenditures from January 1, 1999 through May 15, 1999 for any commissioner or employee of the respondent authority, including location and reason for the trip, for all expenditure accounts, including section 8 account, Veterans Terrace, Hockanum etc;

5. It is found that by letter dated May 25, 1999, the respondent executive director provided the complainant with additional credit card statement records which he had received since his prior response to the complainant.

6. By letter dated and filed on June 8, 1999, the complainant appealed to the Commission alleging that the respondent executive director violated the Freedom of Information Act by denying her a copy of all of the records she requested.

7. It is found that the respondents maintain records other than the credit card statements provided to the complainant, and described in paragraphs 3 and 5, above, which records are responsive to the complainant’s request. Specifically, the respondents maintain vouchers, copies of checks and other records pertaining to travel by commissioners and employees of the respondent authority to conferences or in connection with trips.

8. Section 1-210(a), G.S., (formerly §1-19(a), G.S.), provides in relevant part that “[e]xcept as otherwise provided by any federal law or state statute, all records maintained or kept on file by any public agency…shall be public records and every person shall have the right to inspect such records promptly during regular office or business hours or to receive a copy of such records….”

9. The respondent executive director contends that he fully complied with the complainant’s requests when he provided her with the credit card statements, described in paragraphs 3 and 5, above, because his understanding of her requests was that she wanted only credit card information.

10. It is found that it is clear from the complainant’s second letter, if not from her first, that she wanted more records than those provided to her. It is also found that both of the complainant’s requests, although not perfectly worded, emphasize that she is requesting the location and reason for trips, as well as expenditure account information.

11. Further, it is found that in the spirit of cooperation, once a requester follows up and indicates that records provided are incomplete, a reasonable response would be to contact the requester and, at a minimum, clarify the request if it appears unclear.

12. At the hearing on this matter, the respondent executive director indicated that he has no objection to the complainant inspecting the records described in paragraph 7, above.

13. It is concluded based on the record, that the respondent executive director violated §1-210(a), G.S., (formerly §1-19(a), G.S.), when he failed to promptly provide the complainant with a copy of all of the records responsive to her requests.

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

1. Forthwith, the respondent executive director shall provide the complainant with access to inspect, and the option of receiving a copy, of all of the records of expenditure associated with conferences and/or trips taken by commissioners and employees of the respondent authority between January 1, 1999 and May 15, 1999, including vouchers, copies of checks and any existing records reflecting the accounts to which such expenditures were charged.

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of

November 10, 1999.

_________________________

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:

Wanda Z. Franek

645 Goodwin Street

East Hartford, CT 06108

Executive Director, East Hartford Housing Authority, Town of East Hartford; and East

Hartford Housing Authority, Town of East Hartford

c/o Atty. Ralph J. Alexander

Brady, Willard & Alexander

330 Roberts Street, Suite 400

East Hartford, CT 06108-3604

__________________________

Melanie R. Balfour

Acting Clerk of the Commission

FIC1999-256/FD/mrb/11101999