FOI: FIC2015-800

Final Decision FIC2015-800
 
In the Matter of a Complaint by
FINAL DECISION
 
Louise Czar,
     Complainant
 
     against
 
Docket #FIC 2015-800
Commissioner, State of Connecticut,
Department of Emergency Services and
Public Protection, State Police Division;
and State of Connecticut, Department of
Emergency Services and Public Protection,
State Police Division, 
     Respondents
 
 
 
 
 
 
June 22, 2016
 

     The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on January 11, 2016, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  The matter was consolidated for hearing with Docket #FIC 2015-744, Louise Czar v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, State Police Division; and State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, State Police Division.
 
     After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:
 
     1. The respondents are public agencies within the meaning of §1-200(1), G.S.
 
     2. It is found that on November 4, 2015, the complainant requested “copies of all 911 calls into Troop L and all seven (7) digit calls into Troop L and all radio traffic into and from Troop L for November 3, 2015 from 19:00 hrs. to 21:30 hrs.” 
 
     3. It is found that the respondents acknowledged the complainant’s request on November 5, 2015.
 
     4. By letter filed November 23, 2015, the complainant appealed to this Commission, alleging that the respondents violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act by failing to provide copies of the records she requested. 
 
     5. Section 1-200(5), G.S., provides:
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.
     6. Section 1-210(a), G.S., provides, in relevant part:
Except 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 (1) inspect such records promptly during regular office or business hours, … or (3) receive a copy of such records in accordance with section 1-212.
     7. Section 1-212(a), G.S., provides in relevant part:  “Any person applying in writing shall receive, promptly upon request, a plain, facsimile, electronic or certified copy of any public record.” 
 
     8. It is found that all the records requested by the complainants are public records within the meaning of §§1-200(5), 1-210(a), and 1-212(a), G.S.
 
     9. It is found that, on January 4, 2016, the respondents mailed to the complainant a CD containing the radio transmittals and telephone calls redacted to exclude information obtained from the National Crime Information Center (“NCIC”) and the Connecticut On-Line Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (“COLLECT”) computerized databases.  The complainant received the CD on January 6, 2016. 
 
     10.  It is concluded that the redacted information is exempt from mandatory disclosure pursuant to §29-164f, G.S., as well as 42 U.S.C. §14616.  Commissioner of Public Safety v. FOIC, 144 Conn. App. 821, 76 A.3d 185 (2013); see also Commissioner of Correction v. FOIC; United States of America v. FOIC, 307 Conn. 53, 52 A.3d 636 (2012).
 
     11.  The complainant challenges only the timeliness of the respondents’ compliance.
 
     12.   It is found, based on the respondents’ need to redact information obtained from the NCIC and COLLECT database, the demands of the respondents’ other business, and the intervening holiday season, that the response was not untimely.
 
     13.  It is concluded, therefore, that the respondents did not violate the promptness requirement of §§1-210(a) and 1-212(a), G.S.
 
     The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:
 
     1.  The complaint is dismissed.
 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of June 22, 2016.
 

__________________________
Cynthia A. Cannata
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:
 
Louise Czar
400 Bantam Lake Road
Bantam, CT  06750
 
Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency
Services and Public Protection, State Police Division; and
State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services
and Public Protection, State Police Division
c/o Neil Parille, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
State of Connecticut,
Office of the Attorney General
110 Sherman Street
Hartford, CT  06105
 
 
 
____________________________
Cynthia A. Cannata
Acting Clerk of the Commission
 
 
 
FIC/2015-800/FD/cac/6/22/2016




Content Last Modified on 6/28/2016 1:56:18 PM