FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

            

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on June 30, 2004 at which time the complainant appeared and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  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 by letter dated January 20, 2004, the complainant made a request to the respondent for a copy of photos that were taken by the respondent, or his agent, of vehicles parked on the complainant’s property (hereinafter “the photos”).  It is found that the January 20, 2004 letter was the complainant’s second request for the photos.

 

3.      It is found that after the respondent failed to respond to the complainant’s prior requests, by letter dated February 2, 2004, the complainant made a third request for the photos.

 

4.      It is found that by letter dated February 16, 2004 and filed on February 23, 2004, the complainant appealed to this Commission alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act by failing to comply with his request.

 

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

 

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 . . . receive a copy of such records in accordance with 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. 

 

6.      Section 1-212(a), G.S., provides in relevant part that “any person applying in writing shall receive, promptly upon request, a plain or certified copy of any public record.” 

 

7.      It is found that the respondent maintains the requested photos and such photos are public records within the meaning of §1-210(a), G.S.

 

8.      It is found that the respondent denied the complainant a copy of the requested photos.

 

9.      It is concluded, therefore, that the respondent violated the disclosure 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 respondent shall provide the complainant with a copy of the photos described in paragraph 2 of the findings, above, free of charge.

 

2.      Henceforth, the respondent shall strictly comply with the disclosure provisions of §§1-210(a) and 1-212(a), G.S.

 

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of September 22, 2004.

 

________________________________

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:

 

            Joseph R. Krevis

110 Duane Place

Bridgeport, CT 06610

 

Tax Assessor,

City of Bridgeport,

c/o Russell D. Liskov, Esq.

Associate City Attorney

999 Broad Street, 2^nd floor

Bridgeport, CT 06604

 

 

___________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

FIC/2004-097FD/paj/9/23/2004