Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission

Thank you to everyone who attended our annual Freedom of Information Conference. Missed it? Click here to watch a replay via CT-N

TO: Freedom of Information Commission
FROM: Mary E. Schwind
RE: Minutes of the Commission’s regular meeting of October 9, 2013
DATE: October 10, 2013
     A regular meeting of the Freedom of Information Commission was held on October 9, 2013, in the Freedom of Information Hearing Room, 18-20 Trinity Street, Hartford, Connecticut. The meeting convened at 2:15 p.m. with the following Commissioners present:
     Commissioner Owen P. Eagan, presiding
     Commissioner Amy J. LiVolsi
     Commissioner Matthew Streeter
     Commissioner Christopher Hankins
     Commissioner Lenny Winkler
     Commissioner Ryan Barry
     Also in attendance were Colleen M. Murphy, Clifton A. Leonhardt, Victor R. Perpetua, Tracie C. Brown, Kathleen K. Ross, Lisa F. Siegel, Valicia D. Harmon, Paula S. Pearlman, Gregory F. Daniels, Cindy Cannata and Mary E. Schwind.

     The Commissioners voted (5-0) to adopt the minutes of the Commission’s regular meeting of September 25, 2013.  Commissioner LiVolsi did not participate in this vote.

     Those in attendance were informed that the Commission does not ordinarily record the remarks made at its meetings, but will do so upon request.
 Docket #FIC 2012-677
Luis Diaz v. Chief, Police Department, City of Bridgeport; and Police Department, City of Bridgeport
     The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
 Docket #FIC 2012-691
Andres Sosa v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Correction; and State of Connecticut, Department of Correction
     Andres Sosa participated via speakerphone.  The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.  The proceedings were recorded digitally.
 Docket #FIC 2012-692
Joseph Dinegar v. Superintendent of Schools, Hartford Public Schools; and Hartford Public Schools
     The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
 Docket #FIC 2013-049
David Cutler v. Attorney General, State of Connecticut, Office of the Attorney General; and State of Connecticut, Office of the Attorney General
     The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.  Subsequently, the complainant appeared at the meeting and requested that the matter be reopened.  The Commissioners unanimously voted to reopen the matter.  David Cutler appeared on his own behalf.  Assistant Attorney General Margaret Chapple appeared on behalf of the respondents.  Assistant Attorney General Colleen Valentine, intervener, appeared on her own behalf.   The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.  After the reopening of the matter, the proceedings were recorded digitally.
 Docket #FIC 2013-110
Chuck Flynn and the New London Police Union v. Chairman, Board of Ethics, City of New London; and Board of Ethics, City of New London
     The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
 Docket #FIC 2013-112
Vernon Leftridge, Jr. v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Labor; and State of Connecticut, Department of Labor
     The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
 Docket #FIC 2013-129
Adam Osmond v. Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Administrative Services; and State of Connecticut, Department of Administrative Services
     The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
 Docket #FIC 2013-158
Ethan Book v. Parking Violations Bureau, City of Bridgeport; and City of Bridgeport
     Ethan Book appeared on his own behalf.  Attorney Gregory Conte appeared on behalf of the respondents.  The Commissioners unanimously voted to deny the complainant’s motion to present additional evidence.  The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.  The proceedings were recorded digitally.
 Docket #FIC 2013-172
Nancy Burton v. Daniel C. Esty, Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Energy and Environmental Protection; and State of Connecticut, Department of Energy and Environmental Protection
     Nancy Burton appeared on her own behalf.  Attorney Kenneth Collette appeared on behalf of the respondents.  The Commission unanimously voted to amend the Hearing Officer’s Report.  The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report as amended.*  The proceedings were recorded digitally.
 Docket #FIC 2013-173
Bill Jestreby and Ronald Cowles v. First Selectman, Town of Lebanon; Police Department, Town of Lebanon; Town of Lebanon; Resident State Trooper, Town of Lebanon, State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection; and State of Connecticut, Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection
     Bill Jestreby and Ronald Cowles each appeared on his own behalf.  Attorney Edward O’Connell appeared on behalf of the municipal agency respondents.  Assistant Attorney General Steven Strom appeared on behalf of the state agency respondents.   The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.  The proceedings were recorded digitally.
 Docket #FIC 2013-231
John Sakon v. Community Development Office, Town of Glastonbury; Town Plan  and Zoning Commission, Town of Glastonbury; and Town of Glastonbury
     The Commissioners unanimously voted to adopt the Hearing Officer’s Report.
     Victor Perpetua reported on pending appeals.
     Colleen Murphy suggested that the December 11, 2013 meeting be rescheduled to December 18, 2013 at 2PM.  The Commissioners indicated that they would check their schedules.
     The meeting was adjourned at 3:58 P.M.

________________
Mary E. Schwind
MINREGmeeting 100913/mes/101013
AMENDMENT
 Docket #FIC 2013-172
Nancy Burton v. Daniel C. Esty, Commissioner, State of Connecticut, Department of Energy and Environmental Protection; and State of Connecticut, Department of Energy and Environmental Protection
The first full paragraph on page 3 of the Report is amended as follows:
     In this case, is concluded that, when the respondents provided the complainant with some of the requested records on March 14, 2012, they failed (AS ALLEGED BY [alleges] the complainant) to provide her with other records and, thus, impliedly denied the request in part.  In accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision, because the complainant filed her appeal to the Commission within thirty days of her receipt of March 14, 2012 records, the Commission has jurisdiction to hear and decide this case.  Accordingly, the respondents’ motion to dismiss is denied.