TO: Freedom of Information Commission
FROM: Thomas A. Hennick
RE: Minutes of the Commission’s regular meeting of June 14, 2017
A regular meeting of the Freedom of Information Commission was held on May 24, 2017, in the Freedom of Information Hearing Room, 18-20 Trinity Street, Hartford, Connecticut. The meeting convened at 2:13 p.m. with the following Commissioners present:
Commissioner Owen P. Eagan, presiding
Commissioner Jay Shaw (participated via speakerphone)
Commissioner Jonathan J. Einhorn
Commissioner Christopher P. Hankins
Commissioner Michael C. Daly
Commissioner Lenny T. Winkler
Also present were staff members, Mary E. Schwind, Victor R. Perpetua, Lisa F. Siegel, Kathleen K. Ross, Valicia D. Harmon, Paula S. Pearlman, Cindy Cannata, and Thomas A. Hennick.
A regular meeting of the Freedom of Information Commission was held on May 24, 2017, in the Freedom of Information Hearing Room, 18-20 Trinity Street, Hartford, Connecticut. The meeting convened at 2:13 p.m. with the following Commissioners present:
Commissioner Owen P. Eagan, presiding
Commissioner Jay Shaw (participated via speakerphone)
Commissioner Jonathan J. Einhorn
Commissioner Christopher P. Hankins
Commissioner Michael C. Daly
Commissioner Lenny T. Winkler
Also present were staff members, Mary E. Schwind, Victor R. Perpetua, Lisa F. Siegel, Kathleen K. Ross, Valicia D. Harmon, Paula S. Pearlman, Cindy Cannata, and Thomas A. Hennick.
The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Commission’s regular meeting minutes of May 24, 2017.
Those in attendance were informed that the Commission does not ordinarily record the remarks made at its meetings, but will do so on request.
Docket #FIC 2016-0521 Anthony Torres v. Patricia Kupeck, FOI Administrator, State of Connecticut, Department of Correction; and State of Connecticut, Department of Correction
Anthony Torres participated via speakerphone. Attorney Nancy Canney and Craig Washington appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners unanimously voted twice to amend the Hearing Officer’s Report. The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report as amended.* The proceedings were recorded digitally.
Docket #FIC 2016-0521 Anthony Torres v. Patricia Kupeck, FOI Administrator, State of Connecticut, Department of Correction; and State of Connecticut, Department of Correction
Anthony Torres participated via speakerphone. Attorney Nancy Canney and Craig Washington appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners unanimously voted twice to amend the Hearing Officer’s Report. The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report as amended.* The proceedings were recorded digitally.
Docket #FIC 2016-0701 Abin Britton v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Correction; and State of Connecticut, Department of Correction
The Commissioners unanimously voted to table the Hearing Officer’s Report.
Docket #FIC 2016-0724 Joseph Abraham v. Scott Sansom, Chief, Police Department, Town of East Hartford; Police Department, Town of East Hartford; Town of East Hartford; Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Correction; and State of Connecticut, Department of Correction
Joseph Abraham participated via speakerphone. Attorney Nancy Canney and Craig Washington appeared on behalf of the Department of Correction respondents. The Commissioners voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report. The proceedings were recorded digitally.
Docket #FIC 2016-0498 Phyllis Genel v. First Selectman, Town of Woodbridge; Board of Selectmen, Town of Woodbridge; and Town of Woodbridge
Docket #FIC 2016-0498 Phyllis Genel v. First Selectman, Town of Woodbridge; Board of Selectmen, Town of Woodbridge; and Town of Woodbridge
The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report.
Docket #FIC 2016-0627 Halina Trelski v. President, State of Connecticut, Middlesex Community College; and State of Connecticut, Middlesex Community College
The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report.
Docket #FIC 2016-0678 Katherine Camara v. Ken Demirs, as member, Planning Commission, Town of Watertown; Planning Commission, Town of Watertown; and Town of Watertown
Katherine Camara appeared on her own behalf. Attorney Paul Jessel appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report.The proceedings were recorded digitally.
Docket #FIC 2016-0688 Robert Cushman v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection; and State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection
The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report.
Docket #FIC 2016-0745 Tom Arras v. William Butterly, Jr., First Selectman, Town of Woodbury; Barbara Perkinson, as member, Board of Selectmen, Town of Woodbury; Michael Gransky, as member, Board of Selectmen, Town of Woodbury; and Town of Woodbury
Tom Arras appeared on his own behalf. Attorney Thomas Kaelin appeared on behalf of the Respondents. The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report. The proceedings were recorded digitally.
Docket #FIC 2016-0825 Tom Arras v. William Butterly, First Selectman, Town of Woodbury; Michael Gransky, as member, Board of Selectmen, Town of Woodbury; Barbara Perkinson, as member, Board of Selectmen, Town of Woodbury; and Board of Selectmen, Town of Woodbury
Tom Arras appeared on his own behalf. Attorney Thomas Kaelin appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report. The proceedings were recorded digitally.
Docket #FIC 2016-0791 Dan Barrett and the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut v. Town Manager, Town of Enfield; and Town of Enfield
The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report.
Docket #FIC 2016-0840 Dan Barrett and the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut v. Town Attorney, Town of Enfield; Town Manager, Town of Enfield; and Town of Enfield
The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report.
Docket #FIC 2016-0794 Steve Changaris and the National Waste and Recycling Association v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Energy and Environmental Protection; and State of Connecticut, Department of Energy and Environmental Protection
The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report.
Docket #FIC 2016-0795 Alexander Wood and the Manchester Journal Inquirer v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Correction; and State of Connecticut, Department of Correction
The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report.
Docket #FIC 2016-0817 Patricia Cofrancesco v. Mayor, City of Derby; Police Commission, City of Derby; and City of Derby
Patricia Cofrancesco appeared on her own behalf. Attorney Francis Teodosio appeared on behalf of the respondents. The Commissioners voted, 5-0, to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report. The proceedings were recorded digitally. Commissioner Shaw did not participate in this matter.
Docket #FIC 2016-0824 Marisa Bellair v. Chief, Police Department, City of Meriden; Police Department, City of Meriden; and City of Meriden
The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report.
Docket #FIC 2017-0005 David Knapp v. President, Board of Aldermen, City of Ansonia; Board of Aldermen, City of Ansonia; and City of Ansonia
The Commissioners unanimously voted to approve the Hearing Officer’s Report.
Victor R. Perpetua reported on the order in the Superior Court, Judicial District of New Britain, Memorandum of Decision dated May 16, 2017 in Diana Wentzell, Commissioner, State of Connecticut Department of Education and Department of Education vs. Freedom of Information Commission and Michael Savino, Docket No. HHB-CV-16-6032889-S. No action was taken.
Victor R. Perpetua reported on pending appeals.
Mary E. Schwind reported on legislation.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:37 p.m.
______________
Thomas A. Hennick
MINREGmeeting 06142017/tah/06152017
Thomas A. Hennick
MINREGmeeting 06142017/tah/06152017
AMENDMENTS
Docket #FIC 2016-0521 Anthony Torres v. Patricia Kupeck, FOI Administrator, State of Connecticut, Department of Correction; and State of Connecticut, Department of Correction
The caption in the Hearing Officer’s Report is corrected as follows:
CRAIG WASHINGTON [Patricia Kupeck],
FOI Administrator, State of Connecticut,
Department of Correction; and State of
Connecticut, Department of Correction
FOI Administrator, State of Connecticut,
Department of Correction; and State of
Connecticut, Department of Correction
Paragraph 7 of the Hearing Officer’s Report is amended as follows:
7. It is found that in response to the complainant’s May 12, 2016 request, the respondent department’s FOI liaison, by letter dated May 19, 2016, provided the complainant with records responsive to his requests described in paragraphs 6[3]a, 6[3]b and 6[3]e, above. It is found, however, that the respondents claimed that disclosure of the records described in paragraphs 6[3]c and 6[3]d, above, would create a risk of safety and security within the prison and were withheld pursuant to §1-210(b)(18), G.S.
7. It is found that in response to the complainant’s May 12, 2016 request, the respondent department’s FOI liaison, by letter dated May 19, 2016, provided the complainant with records responsive to his requests described in paragraphs 6[3]a, 6[3]b and 6[3]e, above. It is found, however, that the respondents claimed that disclosure of the records described in paragraphs 6[3]c and 6[3]d, above, would create a risk of safety and security within the prison and were withheld pursuant to §1-210(b)(18), G.S.
Paragraph 9 of the Hearing Officer’s Report is amended as follows:
9. It is found that, by the time of the hearing in this matter, the complainant had been provided with many of the records responsive to his request, including certain collective bargaining agreements, but that he had not been provided with the following:
9. It is found that, by the time of the hearing in this matter, the complainant had been provided with many of the records responsive to his request, including certain collective bargaining agreements, but that he had not been provided with the following:
a. the service contract(s) between DOC and Schulman and Associates, described in paragraph 6[3]a, above, effective between January 2006 and 2010, and pages 39 and 40 of the contract that was provided;
b. page 50 of the service contract between DOC and Bansley and Anthony , LLC, described in paragraph 6[3]b, above;
c. the collective bargaining agreements described in paragraph 6[3]c, above, for certain contract years;
d. the collective bargaining agreements, described in paragraph 6[3]d, above, for certain contract years; and
e. Appendix E of the service contract and memorandum of understanding, described in paragraph 6[3]e, above, that was provided and the contract(s) for the years between 2006 and 2012.
Minutes, Regular Meeting, June 14, 2017
Page 6
Minutes, Regular Meeting, June 14, 2017
Page 6
Paragraph 10 of the Hearing Officer’s Report is amended as follows:
10. With respect to the records described in paragraph 9a, above, the respondents testified, and it is found, that they maintain, and will provide the complainant with the service contract between DOC and Schulman and Associates effective between January 2006 and 2010 which is responsive to his request described in paragraph 6[3]a, above. It is found, however, that pages 39 and 40 of the contract that were provided were forms that, once completed, are not kept with the service contract and therefore are not maintained by the respondent department.
10. With respect to the records described in paragraph 9a, above, the respondents testified, and it is found, that they maintain, and will provide the complainant with the service contract between DOC and Schulman and Associates effective between January 2006 and 2010 which is responsive to his request described in paragraph 6[3]a, above. It is found, however, that pages 39 and 40 of the contract that were provided were forms that, once completed, are not kept with the service contract and therefore are not maintained by the respondent department.
Paragraph 13 of the Hearing Officer’s Report is amended as follows:
13. With respect to the records described in paragraph 9e, above, the respondents testified at the hearing on this matter, and it is found, that they maintain, and will provide the complainant with, a readable copy of Appendix C, a copy of Appendix E, and a copy of the service contract and memorandum of understanding, described in paragraph 6[3]e, above, effective between 2006 and 2012.
13. With respect to the records described in paragraph 9e, above, the respondents testified at the hearing on this matter, and it is found, that they maintain, and will provide the complainant with, a readable copy of Appendix C, a copy of Appendix E, and a copy of the service contract and memorandum of understanding, described in paragraph 6[3]e, above, effective between 2006 and 2012.
Paragraph 16 of the Hearing Officer’s Report is amended as follows:
16. It is found that the respondent department’s FOI Liaison immediately, upon receipt of the May 12, 2016 request, compiled and sent the records responsive to the requests described in paragraphs 6[3]a, 6[3]b, and 6[3]c, above, through the respondent department’s interdepartmental mail on May 19, 2016, to the correctional facility in which the complainant is housed. It is found, however, that those records were not provided to the complainant until July 11, 2016.
16. It is found that the respondent department’s FOI Liaison immediately, upon receipt of the May 12, 2016 request, compiled and sent the records responsive to the requests described in paragraphs 6[3]a, 6[3]b, and 6[3]c, above, through the respondent department’s interdepartmental mail on May 19, 2016, to the correctional facility in which the complainant is housed. It is found, however, that those records were not provided to the complainant until July 11, 2016.
Paragraph 18 of the Hearing Officer’s Report is amended as follows:
18. With respect to the records described in paragraph 6[3]c and 6[3]d, above, it is found that the respondent department’s FOI Liaison withheld the two collective bargaining agreements with the understanding that the union attorney, who claimed that the exemption found in §1-210(b)(18), G.S., was applicable, would appear at the hearing and defend that claim. It is found that once the attorney informed the FOI Liaison that he would not defend the claim before the Commission, the collective bargaining agreements that the respondent department maintained were provided to the complainant on November 30, 2016.
18. With respect to the records described in paragraph 6[3]c and 6[3]d, above, it is found that the respondent department’s FOI Liaison withheld the two collective bargaining agreements with the understanding that the union attorney, who claimed that the exemption found in §1-210(b)(18), G.S., was applicable, would appear at the hearing and defend that claim. It is found that once the attorney informed the FOI Liaison that he would not defend the claim before the Commission, the collective bargaining agreements that the respondent department maintained were provided to the complainant on November 30, 2016.
Paragraph 1 of the Order of the Hearing Officer’s Report is amended as follows:
1. The respondents shall forthwith provide the complainant with a copy of the records described in paragraphs 10 and 13 of the findings, above, free of charge. In addition, the respondents shall notify the Commission, in writing, when said records have been provided to the complainant.