FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by Final Decision
Sharon W. McGrath,
Complainant
against Docket
#FIC 95-203
Seymour First Selectman,
Respondent February 28, 1996
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested
case on December 21, 1995, 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 1-18a(a), G.S.
2. By letter
dated and hand delivered on May 17, 1995, the complainant requested that the
respondent provide her with:
"a) a
detailed selectmen's budget as submitted and
then approved;
b) (i) a written report on the
current companies receiving the SMART (Seymour Manufacturers Assistance
Recruitment/Retention Tax Plan) tax abatement program;
(ii) the actual cost to provide this program;
(iii) the actual criteria used to determine eligibility; and
c) an updated list of current board
and commission members to include the Open Space Advisory Board."
3. By letter
dated June 15, 1995, and filed June 19, 1995, the complainant appealed to the
Commission and alleged that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information
("FOI") Act by failing to comply with her request.
#FIC 95-203 Page
2
4. At the
hearing on this matter, the complainant withdrew that portion of her appeal
relative to her request identified in paragraph 2c, above, because the
respondent complied with that portion of her request in October 1995.
5. It is
found that at a June 6, 1995 meeting of the Seymour Board of Selectmen
(hereinafter "board"), the respondent orally informed the complainant
that he did not maintain any records responsive to the complainant's requests
identified in paragraphs 2b(i) and (ii), above.
6. With
respect to the complainant's request identified in paragraph 2a, above, it is
found that the respondent does not maintain a detailed "selectmen's
budget."
7. It is
found that in the past the board prepared a "selectmen's budget" for
submission to the Seymour Board of Finance, but that pursuant to the 1995 town
charter, the respondent alone submits budget recommendations to the board of
finance.
8. At the
hearing on this matter, the complainant clarified that she is seeking the
respondent's budget recommendations that he submitted to the board of finance.
9. It is
found that in February 1995, the respondent submitted his budget
recommendations in note form to the board of finance but did not make or retain
a copy of such notes.
10. It is
concluded that the respondent did not violate the FOI Act by failing to provide
the complainant with budget documents not in his possession.
11. With
respect to the complainant's request identified in paragraph 2b(iii), above, it
is found that the respondent maintains a grid which illustrates the actual
criteria used to determine eligibility for the SMART program.
12. It is
further found that the grid described in paragraph 11, above, is a public
record within the meaning of 1-18a(d) and 1-19(a), G.S.
13. The
respondent maintains that the complainant, who is a former selectman, received
a copy of the grid in a folder provided at a board meeting sometime in early
1995.
14. It is
found, however, that the complainant did not receive the grid in response to
her May 17, 1995 request until October 1995.
#FIC 95-203 Page
3
15. It is
concluded that by failing to promptly provide the complainant with a copy of
the subject grid, the respondent violated the provisions of 1-15(a), G.S.
The following order by the Commission is hereby
recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned
complaint:
1.
Henceforth, the respondent shall strictly comply with the requirements
of 1-15(a), G.S.
2. The
Commission advises the respondent to consult the Public Records Administrator
to ensure his compliance with the public records retention and destruction
statutes.
3. The
complaint is hereby dismissed with respect to the requests identified in
paragraphs 2a, 2b(i) and (ii), and 2c of the findings, above.
Approved by Order of the
Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of February 28, 1996.
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the
Commission
Docket #FIC 95-203 Page
4
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:
Sharon W. McGrath
7 Omar Street
Seymour, CT 06483
Seymour First Selectman
c/o Colleen D. Fries, Esq.
P.O. Box 1978
Bridgeport, CT 06604
Elizabeth A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the
Commission