FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by Final Decision
Judy Pozzetti,
Complainant
against Docket
#FIC 95-248
Mayor of Middletown,
Respondent May 8, 1996
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested
case on February 14, 1996, at which time the complainant and the respondent
appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and
argument on the complaint. Docket #FIC
95-160, Frank Faraci v. Middletown Office of the City Attorney, was
consolidated with the above-captioned matter for purpose of hearing.
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
of complaint dated July 20, 1995 and filed with the Commission on July 27,
1995, the complainant appealed to the Commission alleging that the respondent
violated the Freedom of Information ("FOI") Act by denying her access
to inspect and copy records pertaining to Frank Violissi, an employee of the
Middletown police department, (hereinafter "department").
3. It is
found that by letter dated June 8, 1995, the complainant requested that the
respondent provide her with access to inspect or copy the following records:
i. the
complete personnel file of Violissi;
ii. any
other files regarding Violissi maintained by the city, including the files of
the chief of police office, the personnel department, the internal affairs of
the police department, the mayor's office and the police station;
iii. all
records disclosing expenditures of federal and state grant funds, including any
unit, division or individual of the police department who received such funds,
for the period 1984 to present;
Docket #FIC 95-248 Page 2
iv. all
records disclosing expenditures of federal and state grant funds to any unit,
division or individual of the police department, including Violissi, the Street
Crime Unit, any drug enforcement unit, detective division, patrol division and
administrative division which received such funds, for the period 1984 to
present;
v. all
records of any audits internal or external for state or federal authorities,
concerning the records in iii and iv, above; and
vi. all
records of civilian and internal complaints regarding Violissi not previously
produced, resulting in disciplinary action or not, for the period 1984 to the
present.
4. It is
found that on June 29, 1995, Violissi objected to the disclosure of the
requested records pertaining to him claiming that disclosure would constitute
an invasion of his privacy.
5. It is
found that the city attorney's office, by letter dated July 7, 1995, denied the
complainant access to the records concerning Violissi on the basis of
Violissi's objection, and informed the complainant that the audit and grant
records were available for inspection in the finance department.
6. Having
failed to receive access to all of the requested records, the complainant filed
this appeal.
7. It is
found that the records at issue in this appeal are those, as described in
paragraph 3 i through 3 vi, inclusive, above, (hereinafter "requested
records").
8. It is
found that various departments within the city maintain records responsive to
the complainant's request as described in paragraph 3, above. Such departments include the personnel,
police (chief's office, filing/storage area of administrative division, training
division, grants applied for, overtime, street crime unit) and finance.
9. It is
found that all of the records described in paragraph 8, above, are public
records within the meaning of 1-18a(d) and 1-19(a), G.S.
Docket #FIC 95-248 Page
3
10. At the
hearing on this matter, the Commission ordered that the respondent submit to
the Commission all of the requested records, pertaining to Violissi for an in
camera inspection. Following the
hearing on this matter, the respondent submitted such records to the Commission
and an in camera inspection was conducted.
11. It is
found that all of the in camera records are public records within the meaning
of 1-18a(d) and 1-19(a), G.S.
12. It is
found that the in camera records are responsive to the complainant's request
for records, as described in paragraph 3 i, 3 ii, 3 iii, 3 iv and 3 vi, above.
13. It is
found that the in camera records consist of 34 files labelled for reference as
Record A and Records 1 through 33.
14. It is
found that in camera Record A is Violissi's personnel file which contains 55
records comprising 81 pages of records of employment application, payroll,
commendation and complaints.
15. It is
found that in camera Record 1 contains 113 pages of records pertaining to
training received by Violissi.
16. It is found
that in camera Record 2 contains 138 pages of records and photographs
pertaining to a civilian complaint and internal affairs investigation.
17. It is
found that in camera Record 3 contains 158 pages and are records of praise,
commendation, awards, vacation, complaint, offense reports, personnel complaint
memorandum, supplementary reports, payroll and change of shift.
18. It is
found that in camera Record 4 contains 47 pages and are records of a civilian
complaint and internal affairs investigation.
19. It is
found that in camera Record 5 contains 19 pages and are records of disciplinary
hearing, exoneration, civilian complaint and department investigation.
20. It is found that in camera Record 6 contains 91
pages and are records of complaint, investigation and findings.
21. It is
found that in camera Record 7 contains 12 pages and are records of complaint
and investigation.
22. It is
found that in camera Record 8 contains 24 pages and are records of a civilian
complaint, supplementary report and internal affairs investigation.
Docket #FIC 95-248 Page
4
23. It is
found that in camera Records 9, 10 and 11 contain 30 pages and are records of
civilian complaint, supplementary report and internal affairs investigation.
24. It is
found that in camera Record 12 contains 37 pages and are records of civilian
complaint, supplementary report and internal affairs investigation.
25. It is
found that in camera Record 13 contains 73 pages and are records of civilian
complaint, supplementary report and internal affairs investigation.
26. It is
found that in camera Record 14 contains 22 pages and are records of civilian
complaint, supplementary report and internal affairs investigation.
27. It is
found that in camera Record 15 contains 21 pages and are records of civilian
complaint, supplementary and investigation reports.
28. It is
found that in camera Record 16 contains 20 pages and are records of civilian
complaint, supplementary report and internal affairs investigation.
29. It is
found that in camera Record 17 contains 44 pages and are records of complaint,
supplementary report and internal affairs investigation.
30. It is
found that in camera Record 18 contains 13 pages and are records of complaint,
supplementary report and internal affairs investigation.
31. It is
found that in camera Record 19 contains 5 pages and are records of an incident
investigation.
32. It is
found that in camera Record 20 contains 41 pages and are records of complaint,
supplementary report and internal affairs investigation.
33. It is
found that in camera Record 21 contains 144 pages and are records of
procedures, complaint, supplementary report and internal affairs investigation.
34. It is
found that in camera Record 22 contains 34 pages and are records of employee
complaint.
35. It is
found that in camera Record 23 contains 148 pages and are records of complaint,
supplementary report and internal affairs investigation.
Docket #FIC 95-248 Page
5
36. It is
found that in camera Record 24 contains 13 pages and are records of employee
complaint, supplementary report and internal affairs investigation.
37. It is
found that in camera Record 25 contains 11 pages and are records of accounting
of grant money.
38. It is
found that in camera Record 26 contains 14 pages and are records of complaint
and supplementary report.
39. It is
found that in camera Record 27 contains 50 pages and are records of employee
complaint, supplementary report and internal affairs investigation.
40. It is
found that in camera Record 28 contains 7 pages and are records of civilian
complaint, supplementary report and internal affairs investigation.
41. It is
found that in camera Record 29 contains 2 pages and are records of civilian
complaint.
42. It is
found that in camera Records 30 and 32 contain 133 pages and are records of
overtime.
43. It is
found that in camera Records 31 and 33 contain 171 pages and are records of
overtime.
44. With
respect to the in camera records, the respondent contends that they are exempt
from disclosure pursuant to 1-19(b)(2), 1-20a, and 1-19(b)(3)(A) and
(D), G.S.
45. Section
1-19(b)(2), G.S., permits the nondisclosure of "personnel or medical files
and similiar files the disclosure of which would constitute an invasion of
personal privacy."
46. Section
1-20a(c), G.S., provides that upon the filing of an objection by an employee
the agency shall not disclose the requested records unless ordered to do so by
the FOI Commission.
47. It is
found that the in camera records constitute or contain personnel or medical and
similiar file information within the meaning of 1-19(b)(2), G.S.
48. It is
found however, that the respondent and Violissi failed to prove that disclosure
of the in camera records, except for document 36 contained in in camera Record
A, would constitute an invasion of personal privacy.
49. It is
found that disclosure of the in camera records, except for document 36
contained in in camera Record A, would not be highly offensive to the reasonable
person.
Docket #FIC 95-248 Page
6
50. It is
also found that the in camera records, except for document 36 contained in in
camera Record A, pertain to matters of legitimate public concern.
51. It is
therefore concluded that the in camera records, except for document 36
contained in in camera Record A, are not exempt from disclosure pursuant to
1-19(b)(2), G.S.
52. With
respect to the request for audit and grant records, as described in paragraph 3
iii, 3 iv and 3 v, above, it is found that the respondent provided access to
certain records responsive to such request by its letter of July 7, 1995,
described in paragraph 5, above.
53. However,
it is also found that records other than those offered to the complainant in
the July 7, 1995 letter, described in paragraph 5, above, may exist which are
responsive to such request for audit and grant records.
54. With
respect to the complainant's June 8, 1995 request, described in paragraph 3,
above, it is concluded that the respondent failed to respond to such request in
a prompt manner, and that the city attorney's response one month after such
request was not prompt within the meaning of 1-19(a), G.S.
55. It is
therefore concluded that the respondent violated 1-19(a), G.S., when it
failed to provide the complainant with a prompt response to her request.
56. With
respect to the respondent's claim of exemption pursuant to 1-19(b)(3)(A)
and (D), G.S., it is found that some of the in camera records contain the names
of informants, witnesses and investigatory techniques, exempt from disclosure
pursuant to 1-19(b)(3)(A) and (D), G.S.
Accordingly, such information may be permissibly withheld from
disclosure.
The following order by the Commission is hereby
recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned
complaint:
1. The
respondent shall within two weeks of the receipt of the notice of the final
decision in this matter arrange to provide the complainant with access to
inspect and to copy all of the in camera records, except document 36 contained
in camera Record A.
2. In
complying with paragraph 1 of this order the respondent may first redact the
following:
a.
Violissi's and his family's home address, home telephone number, social
security number, medical information and any personal account number(s)
contained in any of the in camera records;
Docket #FIC 95-248 Page
7
b.
the identity of informants and witnesses not otherwise known, and
investigatory techniques not otherwise known within the meaning of 1-19(b)(3)(A)
and (D), G.S.
3. With
respect to the request for records as described in paragraph 3 iii, 3 iv and 3
v, of the findings, above, the respondent shall ascertain from the police and
finance departments whether any records exist which have not already been
provided to the complainant. If records
exist which have not already been provided to the complainant, the respondent
shall within two weeks of the receipt of the notice of the final decision in
this matter arrange for access to such records to be provided to the
complainant. If no records exist, the
respondent shall obtain from such police and finance departments affidavits
attesting to a) whether such records existed b) the specific areas of their
departments searched for such records and c) the person(s) conducting such
search, such affidavits to be signed by the police and finance department heads
responsible for the keeping and maintenance of such records, and such
affidavits to be provided to the complainant within two weeks of the receipt of
the notice of the final decision in this matter.
Approved by Order of the
Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of May 8, 1996.
Elizabeth
A. Leifert
Acting
Clerk of the Commission
Docket #FIC 95-248 Page
8
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:
Judy Pozzetti
65 Highland Avenue
Middletown, CT 06457
Mayor of Middletown
c/o Timothy P. Lynch, Esq.
P.O. Box 1300
Middletown, CT 06457-1300
Elizabeth
A. Leifert
Acting Clerk of the Commission