| TO: | Freedom of Information Commission |
| FROM: | Thomas A. Hennick |
| RE: | Minutes of the Commission’s regular meeting of January 13, 2016 |
A regular meeting of the Freedom of Information Commission was held on January 13, 2016, in the Freedom of Information Hearing Room, 18-20 Trinity Street, Hartford, Connecticut. The meeting convened at 2:09 p.m. with the following Commissioners present:
Commissioner Owen P. Eagan, presiding
Commissioner Jay Shaw (participated via speakerphone)
Commissioner Matthew Streeter
Commissioner Christopher P. Hankins
Commissioner Michael C. Daly
Commissioner Jay Shaw (participated via speakerphone)
Commissioner Matthew Streeter
Commissioner Christopher P. Hankins
Commissioner Michael C. Daly
Also present were staff members, Colleen M. Murphy, Mary E. Schwind, Victor R. Perpetua, Clifton A. Leonhardt, Kathleen K. Ross, Lisa F. Siegel, Tracie C. Brown, Valicia D. Harmon, Paula S. Pearlman, Virginia Brown, Cindy Cannata, and Thomas A. Hennick.
The Commissioners voted, 4-0, to approve the minutes of the Commission’s regular meeting of December 16, 2015. Commissioner Daly abstained.
Those in attendance were informed that the Commission does not ordinarily record the remarks made at its meetings, but will do so on request.
|
Diego Vas v. Director, State of Connecticut, Inmate Trust Fund, Department of Correction; and State of Connecticut, Inmate Trust Fund, Department of Correction |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Susan Kniep v. Executive Director, East Hartford Housing Authority, Town of East Hartford; and Housing Authority, Town of East Hartford |
Susan Kniep participated on her own behalf. Attorney Ralph Alexander appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report. The proceedings were recorded digitally.
|
Yvette Tyson v. Chief Executive Officer, Stamford Housing Authority, City of Stamford; and City of Stamford |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to amend the Hearing Officer’s Report. The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report as amended.*
|
Michael Aronow v. Freedom of Information Officer, State of Connecticut, University of Connecticut Health Center; and State of Connecticut, University of Connecticut Health Center |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Michael Aronow v. Freedom of Information Officer, State of Connecticut, University of Connecticut Health Center; and State of Connecticut, University of Connecticut Health Center |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Michael Aronow v. Freedom of Information Officer, State of Connecticut, University of Connecticut Health Center; and State of Connecticut, University of Connecticut Health Center |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Vorcelia Oliphant v. Tax Assessor, Office of the Tax Assessor, City of Meriden; Office of the Tax Assessor, City of Meriden; and City of Meriden |
Vorcelia Oliphant appeared on her own behalf. The Commissioners voted, 4-0, to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report . Commissioner Hankins recused himself from the matter. The proceedings were recorded digitally.
|
Jim Dobson v. Chairman, State of Connecticut, Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, Public Utilities Regulatory Authority; and State of Connecticut, Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, Public Utilities Regulatory Authority |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Pamela Dudgeon-Eisenlohr v. Chairman, Inland Wetlands Commission, Town of Kent; Inland Wetlands Commission, Town of Kent; and Town of Kent |
Donna Hayes appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Kristina Talbert-Slagle v. Superintendent of Schools, Hartford Public Schools; and Hartford Public Schools |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Docket #FIC 2015-318 |
Bettina Drew v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection; and State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection |
Bettina Drew appeared on her own behalf. The Commissioners unanimously voted to remand the matter to the Hearing Officer to reopen the matter. The proceedings were recorded digitally.
|
Docket #FIC 2015-032 |
Renee LaMark Muir v. Chief, Police Department, City of Hartford; Police Department, City of Hartford; and City of Hartford |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Dave Morton v. First Selectman, Town of Westport; and Town of Westport |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Dave Morton v. First Selectman, Town of Westport; and Town of Westport |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Thomas Brody v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Correction; and State of Connecticut, Department of Correction |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
|
Cornell Lewis v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Children and Families; and State of Connecticut, Department of Children and Families |
The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report.
The Commissioners voted, 4-0, to deny a Motion for Declaratory Ruling in Docket #FIC 2015-138, Vorceila Oliphant v. Tax Collector, City of Meriden; and City of Meriden. Commissioner Hankins recused himself from the matter.
The Commissioners unanimously voted, upon reconsideration, to affirm their Final Decision, dated November 18, 2015, in Docket #FIC 2015-147, Marissa Lowthert v. Bruce Likly, Chairman, Board of Education, Wilton Public Schools; Christine Finkelstein, Chris Stroup, Laura Schwemm, Glen Hemmerle, and Lory Rothstein, as members, Board of Education, Wilton Public Schools; and Wilton Public Schools. Attorney Joseph Hubicki appeared on behalf of the complainant. Attorney Jessica Richman-Smith appeared on behalf of the respondents.
Victor R. Perpetua reported on the New Britain Superior Court order in Smith, Bradshaw v. Freedom of Information Commission, Et Al, dated December 18, 2015.
Victor R. Perpetua reported on pending appeals.
Colleen M. Murphy reported on legislation.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:09 p.m.
______________
Thomas A. Hennick
MINREGmeeting 01132016/tah/10142016
AMENDMENTS
|
Yvette Tyson v. Chief Executive Officer, Stamford Housing Authority, City of Stamford; and City of Stamford |
The Hearing Officer’s Report is amended as follows:
29. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE LEASES ARE NOT EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE PURSUANT TO §1-210(B)(2), G.S.
[29]. 30. Although counsel for the respondents did not cite any other statute or provision of law as the basis for an exemption to disclosure, the Commission notes that §17b-90, G.S., requires that the “names of, and any information concerning, persons applying for or receiving assistance from the Department of Social Services or persons participating in a program administered by said department. . .” not be disclosed. It is found that, pursuant to §17b-2, G.S., the Department of Social Services administers Section 8 voucher programs.
[30.] 31. [It is concluded that the leases are not exempt from disclosure pursuant to §1-210(b)(2), G.S.] It is therefore concluded that the respondents violated the disclosure provisions of §§1-210(a) and 1-212(a), G.S., when they declined to provide the non-exempt portions of the leases to the complainant.
[31.] 32. With regard to the complainant’s request for monetary civil penalty, the Commission first notes that the complainant did not identify a person against whom he desired such penalty to be assessed. In addition, the Commission does not believe that a monetary penalty is the best way to help the respondents better understand the requirements of the FOI Act. Accordingly, while the complainant’s request for monetary civil penalties is denied, it is concluded that the respondents are in need of a FOI training session and one is so ordered.
The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint.
1. The respondents shall forthwith provide the complainant with a copy of the responsive leases, free of charge.
2. In complying with this order, the respondents are not required to disclose social security numbers wherever located. In addition, the Commission suggests that the complainant accept a copy of the responsive leases from the respondents with the names and dates of birth of the minor residents redacted. Finally, to the extent that the responsive leases contain the names [or] OF AND ANY information concerning persons applying for or receiving assistance from the Department of Social Services, OR PERSONS PARTICPATING IN A PROGRAM ADMINISTERED BY SAID DEPARTMENT the respondents may redact such information from the leases prior to disclosure.