FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint by | FINAL DECISION | ||
John A. Tatoian, | |||
Complainant | |||
against | Docket #FIC 2005-258 | ||
Assessor, Town of Enfield, | |||
Respondent | March 8, 2006 | ||
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 29, 2005, 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. It is found that, by letter dated May 24, 2005, the complainant requested that the respondent provide him with a copy of the portion of the grand list containing the make, model, year, and assessed value of a motor vehicle owned by Donna Deske [hereinafter “the requested record”].
3. It is found that, by letter dated May 27, 2005, the respondent informed the complainant that the requested record was available for public inspection at her office during normal business hours but that, under the Federal Drivers’ Privacy Protection Act, she could not provide the complainant with a copy of such record. It is further found that such denial was based on the advice of counsel.
4. It is found that the complainant did not reply directly to the letter described in paragraph 3, above, nor did he visit the respondent’s office to inspect the requested record.
5. By letter dated June 1, 2005, and filed with the Commission on June 2, 2005, the complainant alleged that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information Act by denying him a copy of the requested record. At the hearing in this matter, the complainant requested the imposition of a civil penalty against the respondent.
6. 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…or… receive a copy of such records in accordance with section 1-212…."
7. 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.”
8. It is found that, on June 27, 2005, the respondent and her counsel first learned of the complaint described in paragraph 5, above, from a newspaper reporter who was writing a story regarding such complaint. It is also found that, on June 28, 2005, the complainant telephoned the respondent’s counsel to discuss the complaint, but that such conversation deteriorated and ended when the complainant threatened to file a grievance against such counsel.[1]
9. It is found that, on August 2, 2005, the respondent provided the complainant with a copy of the requested record. At the hearing in this matter, respondent’s counsel acknowledged that it was error to deny the respondent a copy of the requested record, as described in paragraph 3, above, and represented that the respondent would promptly comply with the provisions of §§1-210(a), and §1-212(a), G.S., in the future.
10. It is concluded that the respondent violated §1-212(a), G.S., as alleged in the complaint.
11. Based on the facts and circumstances of this case, the Commission declines to consider the imposition of a civil penalty.
On the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint, no order by the Commission is recommended.
Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of March 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:
John A. Tatoian
c/o Worldwide Asset Trust
PO Box 375
Enfield, CT 06082
Assessor, Town of Enfield
c/o Mark J. Cerrato, Esq.
Enfield Town Attorney
820 Enfield Street
Enfield, CT 06082
___________________________________
Petrea A. Jones
Acting Clerk of the Commission
FIC/2005-258FD/paj/3/15/2006
[1] The complainant subsequently filed a grievance against counsel, which was dismissed by the Statewide Grievance Committee.