FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

In the Matter of a Complaint by Final Decision

Philip G. Savva,

Complainant(s)

against Docket #FIC 1995-401

Clinton Police Department,

Respondent(s) September 25, 1996

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on April 25, 1996, at which time the complainant and respondent appeared and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint. The original caption for this case was Philip G. Savva and Ronald J. Piombino v. Clinton Police Department. The case caption has been amended to reflect the fact that by letter dated April 10, 1996, and filed with the Commission on April 12, 1996, Attorney Piombino withdrew his complaint against the respondent.

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. It is found that by letters dated September 28, 1995 and October 16, 1995 (“records requests”), the complainant requested copies of incident reports relating to events at 15 Maple Avenue, Clinton, Connecticut, and involving Maureen Dunn (“reports”).

3. By letter of complaint filed with the Commission on November 22, 1995, the complainant appealed the respondent’s failure to comply with the records requests.

4. It is found that the requested records are public records within the meaning of §§1-18a(d) and 1-19(a), G. S.

5. It is found that the respondent failed to respond to both of the records requests.

6. It is found that the respondent first provided the complainant with a few records in December 1995, solely as a result of a subpoena issued by the complainant’s attorney in connection with a civil action.

7. The respondent concedes that there was no response to the records requests and that compliance was not prompt, but argues that the reason for the delay and inaction was that the department’s computer system was malfunctioning and a computerized search of the files could not be conducted, so someone had to manually go through the department’s files.

8. The respondent claims that all responsive records have been mailed via regular mail to the complainant. Any reports not provided have been “erased” because the charges have been nolled.

9. It is found that the complainant never received the mailing referred to in paragraph 8 of the findings, above.

10. It is concluded that by failing to provide the complainant with the requested records the respondent violated the provisions of §§1-15(a) and1-19(a), G.S.

The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:

1. If the respondent has not already done so, within five days of the date of mailing of the notice of final decision in this case, the respondent shall provide the complainant with a copy of all reports, as described in paragraph 2 of the findings, above, free of charge.

2. With respect to the order in paragraph 1, above, the chief of the respondent department shall prepare and lawfully execute an affidavit stating that all of the department’s files have been thoroughly searched and the reports provided constitute the only reports responsive to the records request.

3. With respect to the order in paragraph 1, above, for each report the respondent claims is exempt from disclosure under §1-19(a), G.S., by operation of §54-142a, G.S., the chief of the respondent department shall prepare and lawfully execute an affidavit wherein the report is identified by charge(s) or date of arrest, and the dates of disposition and erasure are clearly set forth in the affidavit.

4. Henceforth the respondent shall strictly comply with the public records requirements set forth in §§1-15(a) and 1-19(a), G.S.

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of September 25, 1996.

__________________________

Elizabeth A. Leifert

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:

Philip G. Savva

10 Paper Mill Road

Killingworth, CT 06419

Clinton Police Department

48 East Main Street

Clinton, CT 06413

__________________________

Elizabeth A. Leifert

Acting Clerk of the Commission