As of September 5, 2022, Freedom of Information Commission meetings and contested case hearings will resume being conducted in person. All parties and witnesses must appear in person for their contested case hearings and Commission meetings. Please access this link or contact the Commission for further information.

Final Decision FIC2011-186
In the Matter of a Complaint by
FINAL DECISION
Peter W. Quercia, Jr.,
     Complainant
     against
Docket #FIC 2011-186
Superintendent, Windham Public
Schools; and Board of Education,
Windham Public Schools,
     Respondents
March 14, 2012

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on January 19, 2012, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  
 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.  By letter of complaint filed April 11, 2011, the complainant appealed to the Commission, alleging that the respondents violated the Freedom of Information (“FOI”) Act by not responding adequately to his April 1, 2011 letter.
3.  It is found that the complainant’s April 1, 2011 letter asks for the following:
     a.   the name of the person who claimed the complainant stuffed an American flag into a garbage can adjacent to the high school’s main office (the complainant believed the alleged incident was captured on video security tape);
     b.   a time to meet with the high school principal to view this evidence;
     c.   a copy of “the comprehensive audit conducted by an independent education firm for the State … Department of Education;” and
     d.   written confirmation as to whether the complainant had or had not been banned from walking on school grounds after classes end for the day.
4.  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, or to which a public agency is entitled to receive a copy by law or contract under section 1-218, whether such data or information be handwritten, typed, tape-recorded, printed, photostated, photographed or recorded by any other method.
5.  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, (2) copy such records in accordance with subsection (g) of section 1-212, or (3) receive a copy of such records in accordance with section 1-212.    
6.  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.”
7.  It is concluded that, to the extent that the requested information is contained in the respondents’ records, those records are public records within the meaning of §§1-200(5) and 1-210(a), G.S.
8. It is found that the complainant’s request for the name of the person who reported the alleged flag incident is not a request for records.
9. It is found that there is no videotape of the alleged incident, or of the time that the incident is alleged to have occurred, because the security video tape had been over-written by the time the complainant made his request.
10.  It is found that the respondents did arrange for several meetings between the complainant and the superintendent of schools, as well as with the high school principal, including a visit to the school’s information technology department so that the complainant could see how the security cameras worked.
11. At the hearing, the complainant stated that his request for the “comprehensive audit” described in paragraph 3(c), above, was moot.
12. It is found that the complainant’s request in paragraph 3(d), above, is not a request for an existing record, but a request that the respondents write him a letter telling him whether he is banned from school grounds or not.
13. It is concluded that the respondents did not violate the FOI Act as alleged.

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 March 14, 2012.
__________________________
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:
Peter W. Quercia, Jr.
300 Walnut Street
Willimantic, CT  06226-1663
Superintendent, Windham Public Schools; and
Board of Education, Windham Public Schools
c/o Thomas B. Mooney, Esq.
Shipman & Goodwin LLP
One Constitution Plaza
Hartford, CT  06103-1919
____________________________
Cynthia A. Cannata
Acting Clerk of the Commission
FIC/2011-186/FD/cac/3/14/2012