FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by			FINAL DECISION
Steven P. Bosco,
		Complainants
	against		Docket #FIC 2001-155
Michael DeNegris, Mayor, Town of Wolcott,
		Respondents	May 23, 2001

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on April 24, 2001, 2000, at which time the complainant 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 respondent is a public agency within the meaning of §1-200(1), G.S.

 

2.  By letter dated March 19, 2001, and filed on March 20, 2001, the complainant appealed to this Commission, alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information [hereinafter “FOI”] Act by issuing a February 23, 2001, memorandum to employees of the town of Wolcott in contravention of such act.  The complainant asked for the imposition of civil penalties in this matter.  

 

3.  It is found that, on February 23, 2001, the respondent caused a memorandum to be issued to the employees of the Town of Wolcott which established the following procedures for all town offices, excepting the town clerk:

 

“Request to view or make copies of any files or documents under FOI must be in writing, addressed to the Mayor’s office….No information should be given out to any person, without prior written approval of the Mayor’s office regardless of their position on any board or commission within the Town of Wolcott.  No board or commission member is “entitled” to access any other commission’s files without an FOI request….Current personnel authorized to release information requested under the FOI Act are: Mayor [and] Town Council Chairperson.”

 

            4.  Section 1-210(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, 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 the right to inspect such records promptly during regular office or business hours and to receive a copy of such records in accordance with the provisions of section 1-212.  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.

 

5.  Section 1-212(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that “[a]ny person applying in writing shall receive, promptly upon request, a plain or certified copy of any public record . . . .The fee for any copy provided in accordance with the [FOI] Act…shall not exceed fifty cents per page.”  [Emphasis added.]

 

      6.  It is found that the procedures contemplated in the memorandum described in paragraph 3, above, conflict with the provisions of §§1-210(a) and 1-212(a), G.S., and diminish and curtail the rights granted by such provisions, insofar as they require written requests for inspection of public records and prohibit Wolcott public agencies, other than the mayor and town council chairperson, from performing their statutory duties. 

 

      7.  At the hearing in this matter, the respondent acknowledged the deficiencies in the memorandum described in paragraph 3, above, and submitted for the Commission’s review a proposed revised procedure for responding to FOI requests [hereinafter “proposal”], which the respondent intends to implement.

 

8.  It is found that the proposal sets forth the following procedures: that only requests for copies of public records be in writing; that public agencies cannot require identification before complying with an FOI request; that all requests should be fulfilled within 4 days; that the public has a right to public records and public meetings; and that any questions as to whether a requested record is exempt must be immediately addressed to the mayor or town attorney. 

 

9.  It is found that the proposal comports with the requirements of the FOI Act; however, §§1-210(a) and 1-212(a), G.S., require prompt, rather than mandatory 4-day, compliance. 

 

10.  In consideration of the statements and findings in paragraphs 7 through 9, above, no civil penalties are recommended. 

 

 

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

 

1.  The memorandum described in paragraph 3 of the findings, above, is null and void. 

 

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of May 23, 2001.

 

 

_________________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

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:

 

Steven P. Bosco

50 Woodward Road

Wolcott, CT 06716

 

Michael DeNegris, Mayor

Town of Wolcott

c/o Brian Tynan, Esq.

Tynan & Iannone

250 Wolcott Road

Wolcott, CT 06716

 

 

 

________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

FIC/2001-155/FD/paj/05/29/2001