FREEDOM
OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
|
In the Matter of a Complaint by |
FINAL DECISION |
||
|
|
|||
|
|
Complainants |
|
|
|
|
against |
Docket #FIC 2001-468 | |
|
Superintendent of Schools, Regional School District One; and Business Manager, Board of Education, Regional School District One, |
|
||
|
|
Respondent |
February 27, 2002 | |
|
|
|
|
|
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on November 19, 2001, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint. Pursuant to the Commission’s order of December 27, 2001, the respondents submitted to the Commission, as an “after-filed” exhibit, the respondent district’s contract with Burlington Construction Company.
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 §1-200(1), G.S.
2. It is found that by letter dated September 29, 2001, the complainant requested that the respondents provide her with access to review and copy certain records pertaining to the additions and renovations to the Housatonic Valley Regional High School, state project #201-031VA/N. Specifically, the complainant requested the following:
(i) any and all project related correspondence;
(ii) any and all project billings and/or requisitions including architectural, construction manager an subcontractors;
(iii) any and all project related contracts including general conditions and addendums;
(iv) any and all project related change orders or change proposal requests;
(v) any and all project meeting minutes including but not limited to building committee meetings, owner meetings, subcontractor meetings;
(vi) all project related budget and funding information; and
(vii) any and all project photos taken to date.
(hereinafter “requested records”).
3. It is found that the respondents provided the complainant with access to all of the requested records except the project’s construction manager’s daily reports (hereinafter “daily logs”).
4. Having failed to receive access to the daily logs, the complainant by letter dated October 5, 2001 and filed with the Commission on October 9, 2001 appealed, alleging that the respondents violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act by denying her access to the such logs.
5. Section 1-200(5), G.S., defines “public records or files” as follows:
any recorded data or information relating to the conduct of the public's business prepared, owned, used, received or retained by a public agency, whether such data or information be handwritten, typed, tape-recorded, printed, photostated, photographed or recorded by any other method. [Emphasis added.]
6. Section 1-210(a), G.S., further provides:
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 the 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 1-212. [Emphasis added.]
7. The respondents contend that they do not have, and have never had the daily logs; and that such logs are not “public records” within the meaning of the §§1-200(5) and 1-210(a), G.S., because they are neither records “owned, used, received or retained” by the respondent district, nor are they records “maintained or kept on file” by the district. The respondents contend further that unlike certain “monthly written reports” which the construction manager must provide to the respondent district, there is no requirement that the construction manager provide the daily logs to the district. The complainant on the other hand contends that the logs are “owned” by the respondent district. Both the complainant and the respondents point to the language of the contract in support of their respective positions.
8. It is found that the construction manager for the project is Burlington Construction Company, a private company hired by the respondent district.
9. It is found that §2.3.2 of the contract between Burlington and the respondent district provides:
the construction manager shall provide monthly written reports to the owner and architect on the progress of the entire work. The construction manager shall maintain a daily log containing a record of weather, subcontractors working on the site, number of workers, work accomplished, problems encountered and other similar relevant data as the owner may reasonably require. The log shall be available to the owner and architect. [Emphasis added.]
10. It is found that the daily logs are not records that are “owned, used, received or retained” by the respondent district, or records “maintained or kept on file” by the respondent district.
11. It is also found that pursuant to the language of the contract the respondent district has a right, if it chooses to exercise it, to have the construction manager’s logs made available to it.
12. However, based on the foregoing, it is concluded that the daily logs are not “public records or files” of the respondent district, within the meaning of §§1-200(5) and 1-210(a), G.S., and therefore, the respondents did not violate the FOI Act as alleged in the complaint.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:
1. The complaint is hereby dismissed.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of February 27, 2002.
_______________________________________
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:
Superintendent of Schools,
Regional School District One;
and Business Manager, Board
of Education, Regional School
District One
c/o Thomas N. Sullivan, Esq.
Sullivan, Schoen, Campane and Connon, LLC
646 Prospect Avenue
Hartford, CT 06105-4286
________________________________
Petrea A. Jones
Acting Clerk of the Commission
FIC/2001-468/FD/paj/2/28/2002