FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on November 12, 2002, at which time the complainant appeared and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  However, the respondent failed to appear.

           

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.  It is found that, on July 10, 2002, the complainant hand-delivered to the respondent Town Administrator, a hand-written note, dated that day, requesting that the respondent provide him with the following:

 

a.       Any locations where road sand sweeping have been used as fill.

 

b.  Proof of when the town administrator was first employed by the Town of Stafford.

 

3.  The note further asked that the information be faxed to the complainant or that the complainant be called so he could pick up the material.

 

4.  It is found that, with respect to paragraph 2b, above, the respondent satisfactorily complied with the complainant’s request.

 

5.  It is found that, by letter dated July 23, 2002, the respondent identified certain locations where street sweepings were used.  The respondent also enclosed a copy of the Department of Environmental Protection guidelines for uses of street sweepings.

 

6.  By letter of complaint dated July 22, 2002, and filed with the Commission on July 24, 2002, the complainant alleged that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act by failing to provide the complainant with the information regarding road sand sweeping as requested in paragraph 2a, above.

 

            7.  Section 1-200(5), G.S., defines “public records” to include:

“…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.”

 

8.  Section 1-210(a), G.S., provides in relevant part:

 

[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 (1) inspect such records promptly during regular office or business hours, (2) copy such records in accordance with subsection (g) of section 1-212, or (3) receive a copy of such records in accordance with section 1-212….

 

            9.  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.”

 

 

            10.  It is found that to the extent records or information exists that are responsive to the complainant’s request, such records are public records within the meaning of §§1-210(a) and 1-212(a), G.S.

 

            11.  It is found that the respondents spread as much as 6,000 square yards of sand per year, and sweeps up approximately 1,500 square yards per year.  The respondent identified records accounting for only about 300 square yards of sand that is swept up.

 

            12.  It is found that the respondents did not substantially comply with the request made by the complainant in paragraph 2a, above.

 

            13.  It is also found that records the respondent identified regarding certain locations where street sweepings were used sought by the complainant in paragraph 2a, above, were not provided in a timely fashion.

 

14.  It is therefore concluded that the respondents violated the promptness provisions of  §§1-210(a) and 1-212(a), G.S.

 

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

 

1.  Forthwith, the respondents shall provide the complainant with records relating to the request in paragraph 2a, above.

 

2.  In complying with paragraph 1 of this order, the respondents shall also forthwith submit to the complainant an affidavit setting forth what diligent steps they have undertaken to ascertain whether such documents exist and setting forth what, if any, documents do exist.

 

 

 

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

March 12, 2003.

 

 

________________________________________________

Dolores E. Tarnowski

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:

 

Allen Bacchiochi

12 Hopyard Road

Stafford Springs, CT   06076

 

 

Thomas J. Fiore, Esq.

14 West Stafford Road

Stafford Springs, CT   06076

 

 

 

________________________________________________

Dolores E. Tarnowski

Clerk of the Commission

 

 

FIC/2002-334/FD/det/03182003