FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on September 30, 2005, at which time the complainant and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  For purposes of hearing, this matter was consolidated with Docket #FIC 2005-077; Christopher Miner v. Director, Administrative Services Department, Town of Stonington.

           

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 e-mail dated March 1, 2005, the complainant requested that the respondent provide him a digital copy of certain data tables from the town of Stonington’s CAMA database [hereinafter “the requested records”].  It is found that the respondent promptly provided certain of the requested records to the complainant but that, by e-mail dated March 10, 2005, the complainant informed the respondent that certain tables were missing.

 

3.  It is found that, by e-mail dated March 16, 2005, the respondent informed the complainant that the records he was seeking could not be obtained without preparing a special report, which she was not obligated to do.

 

4.  By letter dated March 17, 2005, and filed with the Commission on March 18, 2005, the complainant alleged that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information [hereinafter “FOI”]  Act by declining to provide him with the requested records for a reasonable fee and by maintaining a computer system that does not allow easy access to the requested records.

 

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.” 

 

6.       Section 1-211, G.S., provides in relevant part that: 

 

“(a)  Any public agency which maintains public records in a computer storage system shall provide, to any person making a request pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, a copy of any nonexempt data contained in such records, properly identified, on paper, disk, tape or any other electronic storage device or medium requested by the person, if the agency can reasonably make such copy or have such copy made.  Except as otherwise provided by state statute, the cost for providing a copy of such data shall be in accordance with the provisions of section 1-212.”

 

(b)  Except as otherwise provided by state statute, no public agency shall enter into a contract with, or otherwise obligate itself to, any person if such contract or obligation impairs the right of the public under the Freedom of Information Act to inspect or copy the agency's nonexempt public records existing on-line in, or stored on a device or medium used in connection with, a computer system owned, leased or otherwise used by the agency in the course of its governmental functions.”

 

7.  Section 1-212, G.S. provides, in relevant part that:

 

"(b)  The fee for any copy provided in accordance with subsection (a) of section 1-211 shall not exceed the cost thereof to the public agency.  In determining such costs for a copy, other than for a printout which exists at the time that the agency responds to the request for such copy, an agency may include only:

 

(1)  An amount equal to the hourly salary attributed to all agency employees engaged in providing the requested computer-stored public record, including their time performing the formatting or programming functions necessary to provide the copy as requested, but not including search or retrieval costs except as provided in subdivision (4) of this subsection;

 

(2)  An amount equal to the cost to the agency of engaging an outside professional electronic copying service to provide such copying services, if such service is necessary to provide the copying as requested;

 

(3)  The actual cost of the storage devices or media provided to the person making the request in complying with such request; and

 

(4)  The computer time charges incurred by the agency in providing the requested computer-stored public record where another agency or contractor provides the agency with computer storage and retrieval services… 

 

(c)  A public agency may require the prepayment of any fee required or permitted under the Freedom of Information Act if such fee is estimated to be ten dollars or more.  The sales tax provided in chapter 219 shall not be imposed upon any transaction for which a fee is required or permissible under this section or section 1-227.”

 

8.       It is found that, during March 2005, the respondent provided the

 complainant with all requested records, for no fee. 

 

9.  Based on the facts and circumstances of this case, it is concluded that the respondent promptly provided the complainant with the requested records, and as a consequence, 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 8, 2006.

 

________________________________

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:

 

Christopher Miner

322 Captain’s Walk

New London, CT 06320

 

Assessor, Town of Stonington

c/o Thomas J. Londregan, Esq.

38 Huntington Street

New London, CT 06320

 

 

 

___________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

 

FIC/2005-125FD/paj/2/15/2006