FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on May 25, 2006, 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, the above-captioned matter was consolidated with docket #FIC 2006-050, Robert H. Kalechman v. First Selectman, Town of Simsbury.

 

            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.  By letter dated December 7, 2005, the complainant followed up on an earlier oral request made at a Simsbury Board of Selectmen meeting, and requested from the respondent the following information:

a.       name of the person or persons who had applied for the loan in order to give the Simsbury Historical Society one-hundred and fifty-thousand dollars ($150,000) for the restoration of the old probate court in Simsbury;

b.      how the Town Economic Assistance Program (STEAP) received these monies and who lobbied for them;

c.       who presented the information to the [state] Department of Economic and Community Development; and

d.      was this matter presented to the Board of Selectmen in public or secret proceedings?

 

3.  By letter of complaint, dated December 9, 2005 and filed December 15, 2005, the complainant appealed to the Commission, alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act by failing to provide him with the information described in paragraph 2, above.

 

4.  Section 1-200(5), G.S., provides in relevant part:

 

“Public records or files” means 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.

 

5.  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…receive a copy of such records in accordance with section 1-212….

 

6.  Section 1-212(a), G.S., provides in relevant part: “[a]ny 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 does not have or maintain records containing the information requested by the complainant.

 

8.  It is found however, that in an attempt to assist the complainant obtain the information he was seeking, the respondent contacted the Simsbury Historical Society and asked its Executive Director to explain and provide the respondent with information that would answer many of the complainant’s questions, and that would be responsive to the request as described in paragraph 2, above.

 

9.  It is found that, the Executive Director of the Simsbury Historical Society wrote a letter back to the respondent, dated December 9, 2005, which letter provided background and other information about the Simsbury Historical Society and explained, among other things, that the Historical Society is a non-profit tax exempt organization that is not part of the Simsbury town government, and that in 1998 it was awarded a grant totaling $150,000 from the State of Connecticut’s “Restoration of Historic Assets in CT Fund” to move and restore the old probate court building.

 

10.  It is also found that, by letter dated December 12, 2005, the respondent informed the complainant that neither he nor the board of selectmen oversees the activities of the Simsbury Historical Society.  Additionally, the respondent provided the complainant with a copy of the letter he had received from the Executive Director of the Simsbury Historical Society, described in paragraph 9, above.  The respondent stated that information contained in such letter would answer many of the complainant’s questions.

 

11.  Based on the foregoing, it is concluded that the respondent 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 August 9, 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:

 

Robert H. Kalechman

971 Hopmeadow Street

Simsbury, CT 06070

 

First Selectman,

Town of Simsbury

c/o Robert M. DeCrescenzo, Esq.

Updike, Kelly & Spellacy

PO Box 231277

One State Street

Hartford, CT 06123-1277

 

 

___________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

 

FIC/2005-606FD/paj/8/10/2006