The document outlines the provisions of the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, detailing public access to records maintained by public agencies. It emphasizes the rights of individuals to inspect, copy, and receive copies of public records, as well as the exceptions and exemptions related to personal privacy and the process for handling FOI requests. Additionally, the document covers the requirements for public agency meetings, including definitions, notice requirements, and the rights of attendees.

1. Presented by
Tracie C. Brown
Principal Attorney
Freedom of Information Commission

2.  Records Provisions
 Meetings Provisions
 The FOI Commission
 Q&A

3. Public Records

4.  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)
 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
◦ Except where federal law or state statute provides
otherwise.

6. The Public has a right to:
 (1) inspect such records promptly during
regular office or business hours,
 (2) copy such records …
 (3) receive a copy of such records…

7.  The Act also provides that:
 Any person applying in writing shall receive,
promptly upon request, a plain, facsimile,
electronic or certified copy of any public record.
 The type of copy provided shall be within the
discretion of the public agency, except (1) the
agency shall provide a certified copy whenever
requested, and (2) if the applicant does not have
access to a computer or facsimile machine, the
public agency shall not send the applicant an
electronic or facsimile copy.

8.  Without undue delay
 Take into account the agency’s workload
 FOI requests are a part of the agency’s duties
and should be given no greater or lesser
priority simply because it is an FOI request
 Take into account the requester’s time
requirements
 Take into account size and difficulty of the
request

9.  Right to inspect records promptly during regular
office or business hours
 Right to receive a copy promptly upon request
 No duty to conduct research
 No duty to create records that do not already
exist
 Electronic scanning of records now recognized
by statute

10. Exceptions are Mandatory
 Federal law (includes non-statutory forms of
binding law, such as agency regulations)
 State statute (does not include non-statutory
forms of law, such as agency rules or
regulations or local law)
Conn. Gen. Stat. §1-210(a)

11.  Exemptions are permissive or discretionary – i.e.,
an agency need not invoke them
 Exemptions are listed and described in C.G.S. sec.
1-210(b) of the FOI Act

12.  Exclusions are mandatory
 They’re listed and described in other sections of
the FOI Act (e.g., C.G.S. §1-217 which excludes
residential addresses of certain public safety
officials)

13. •State Agencies – no more than 25 cents per
page
•All other public agencies – no more than 50
cents per page
•If any copy requires a transcription, or if
any person applies for a transcription of a
public record, the fee for such transcription
shall not exceed the cost thereof to the
public agency
Conn. Gen. Stat. §1-212(a)(1) and (2)

14. Computer-Stored Public Records
 Any agency which maintains records in a
computer storage system must provide a copy
of any nonexempt data, on paper, disk, tape or
any other electronic storage device or medium
requested by the person, if the agency can
reasonably make such copy or have such copy
made
 Except as otherwise provided by state statute,
the cost for providing a copy of such data shall
be in accordance with the provisions of C.G.S.
sec.1-212
Conn. Gen. Stat. §1-211

16. Robert H. Boone and Journal Inquirer
v.
Metropolitan District Commission
Docket #FIC 2000-137

17.  FACTS:
◦ The complainants made a request for access to
records that identified the individual employees by
name and the discipline each received for their
alleged involved in a fire that destroy the MDC’s
composting facility.
◦ Upon receipt of the request, MDC determined only
that the records requested would impact the
personal privacy of the employees.
◦ MDC informed that employees of the request and
gave them an opportunity to object to the
disclosure of the records

18.  FACTS cont.
◦ The employees objected to the disclosure of the
records claiming disclosure would invade their
personal privacy.
◦ Three of the employees were involved in a
grievance regarding the disciplinary action taken
against them at the time of the request.

19. What right was alleged to be violated?
§1-210(a)
…every person shall have the right to inspect
such records promptly during regular office
or business hours…

20.  MDC’s defense:
◦ §1-210(b)(2)
Nothing in the Freedom of Information Act shall be
construed to require disclosure of …Personnel or
medical files and similar files the disclosure of
which would constitute an invasion of personal
privacy…

21.  MDC’s defense cont.
◦ §1-214(c)
….Upon the filing of an objection as provided in
this subsection, the agency shall not disclose the
requested records unless ordered to do so by the
Freedom of Information Commission pursuant to
section 1-206…

22. A CLOSER LOOK AT
§1-214
Refer to your copy of the FOI Act

23. Karen Perkins v. FOIC
 The claimant must first establish that the files
in question are personnel, medical or similar
files.
 Second, the claimant must show that
disclosure of the records would constitute an
invasion of personal privacy.

24. Karen Perkins v. FOIC
 In determining whether disclosure would
constitute an invasion of personal privacy, the
claimant must establish both of two
elements:
 first, that the information sought does not
pertain to legitimate matters of public
concern, and
 second, that such information is highly
offensive to a reasonable person.

25. What do you think?

26. Dan Levine
v.
Public Information Officer,
Police Department, City of Hartford
Docket 2004-092

27.  FACTS:
◦ Mr. Levine asked for access to all internal affairs investigations
related to a specific officer.
◦ The HPD gave him access one but the officer objected to the
disclosure of the other so HPD withheld it.
◦ The off duty conducted was related to his position as a police
officer – it involved his behavior in a program sanction and
promoted by the HPD.
◦ The matter was not criminal.
◦ The file contained no charges of misconduct and no disciplinary
action was taken against the officer.

28.  FACTS cont.
◦ The file contained a letter of complaint, a transcript of
interviews with the officer addressing the complaint, and a
recommendation that the officer conduct the program
differently in one respect.
◦ Most of the file contained letters from parents written in
support of and praising the officer. No discipline was
recommended in the report.
◦ The letter of complaint questioned the propriety of the
participants in the program staying overnight at the officer’s
home.
◦ The officer had not reviewed the file before he objected to the
disclosure.

29. What right was alleged to be violated?
§1-210(a)
…every person shall have the right to inspect
such records promptly during regular office
or business hours…

30. Karen Perkins v. FOIC
 In determining whether disclosure would
constitute an invasion of personal privacy, the
claimant must establish both of two
elements:
 first, that the information sought does not
pertain to legitimate matters of public
concern, and
 second, that such information is highly
offensive to a reasonable person.

31.  Given the facts, could the officer meet the
test for invasion of personal privacy?
 What do you think about the fact that he
never looked at the file before he objected to
its disclosure?

32. Uncorroborated Allegations
 1-210(b)(3)(G) provides in relevant part
that…
◦ Nothing in the Freedom of Information Act shall be
construed to require disclosure of… Records of law
enforcement agencies not otherwise available to the
public which records were compiled in connection
with the detection or investigation of crime, if the
disclosure of said records would not be in the
public interest because it would result in the
disclosure of …uncorroborated allegations subject
to destruction …

33. Does the exemption apply?

34. Any questions?

35. Practice Skit

36. Public Meetings

37. Definition of Public Meeting
 Any hearing of a public agency
 Other proceedings of a public agency
 Any convening or assembly of a quorum of a
multimember public agency and
 Any communication by or to a quorum of a
multimember public agency, whether in person or
by means of electronic equipment, to discuss or act
upon a matter over which the public agency has
supervision, control, jurisdiction or advisory power

38. Non-meeting Meetings
Exclusions to the open meetings requirements of the
FOI Act are generally found in C.G.S. sec. 1-200(2),
they include:
- chance or social gatherings;
- collective bargaining strategy and
negotiations;
- caucuses; and
- communications limited to notice of meetings
or agendas

39. 1-225(a)
The meetings of all public agencies, except executive
sessions as defined in C.G.S. §1-200(6) shall be
open to the public

40. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Only agency members may attend, except
for persons invited to testify or give opinion
(attendance limited to time persons are
providing testimony or opinion). The
agency must vote, by at least 2/3rds of
those present and voting, to convene in
executive session in public, and must state
the purpose.

41. EXECUTIVE SESSION
◦ Permitted executive session purposes are:
◦ 1) discussion of appointment, performance, evaluations, health, &
dismissals of an employee (the employee must be notified and can
require a public meeting);
◦ 2) strategy & negotiations with respect to pending claims and
litigation;
◦ 3) security matters;
◦ 4) real estate acquisition by a political subdivision (if openness is
likely to increase the price); and
◦ 5) discussions that would disclose records that are exempt from
disclosure.

42. The FOI Act Recognizes
3 Types of Meetings
Regular.
Special.
Emergency (or emergency special).
(Conn. Gen. Stat. sec. 1-225(b) and (c))

43. * Available with Sec’y Of State (state) or Town Clerk and in place of business. Also, must be posted on agency
website.
** Available with Sec’y Of State (state) or Town Clerk and in place of business. Also, must be posted on
websites for state agencies only.
***Must be posted on agency website for state agencies only.
NOTICE OF MEETINGS
2/2/2015 43
Type Notice Agenda/
Notice
Contents
Adding to
Agenda/
Notice
Filing Record
of Votes
Filing
Minutes
Regular File yearly
schedule with
Sec’y Of State
(state) or Town
Clerk
(municipal) by
Jan. 31st.**
Agenda
available at
least 24hrs.
before
meeting.**
Agenda items
may be added
by 2/3 vote of
those members
present and
voting.
Within 48 hrs. after
meeting (if minutes
not available within
48 hours).
Within 7 calendar
days after
meeting.***
Special At least 24 hrs.
before meeting,
file at Sec’y Of
State (state) or
Town Clerk
(municipal).*
At least 24 hrs.
before meeting.
Time, place and
business must
be included in
notice.*
Not permitted Within 48 hrs. after
meeting (if minutes
not available within
48 hours).
Within 7 business
days after
meeting.***
Emergency None required
if emergency is
justified.
None required
if emergency is
justified.
Only
emergency
matters may be
considered.
Within 48 hrs. after
meeting (if minutes
not available within
48 hours).
Within 72 hrs. after
meeting. Must state
reason for
emergency.***

45. Rick Guinness and the New Britain Herald
v.
Board of Finance, City of New Britain
Docket #FIC 2008-164

46.  FACTS
◦ Pursuant to New Britain’s charter, town departments
were required to submit budget recommendations
after which a hearing on the recommendations was
required.
◦ Two members of the Board of Finance met with the
Board of Education to discuss its submitted budget
recommendations.
◦ There was no quorum of the Board of Finance
◦ There Board of Finance has supervision, jurisdiction,
control, advisory power over all town budget matters.
◦ There was no notice of the workshop, and there were
no minutes of it either.

47. What right was allegedly violated?
 1-225(a)
◦ The meetings of all public agencies, except
executive sessions, as defined in subdivision (6) of
section 1-200, shall be open to the public.

48. Was there a meeting?
We must ask was there one of the following:
◦ A hearing or other proceeding
◦ Any convening or assembly of a quorum of a
multimember public agency
◦ Any communication by or to a quorum of a
multimember public agency
◦ Was there discussion or action upon a matter
over which the Board had supervision, control,
jurisdiction or advisory power.

49. Supreme Court
…“…the statutory definition of public
meetings contained in §1-18a(b) [re-codified
as §1-200(2), G.S.] must be read to limit
rather than to expand the opportunities for
public agencies to hold closed hearings."
See Glastonbury Education Association v. Freedom of Information
Commission, 234 Conn. 704, 713-714 (1995).

50. Supreme Court
“It is also specifically concluded that it is not
necessary to have a quorum in order to have
a "hearing" or "proceeding", and therefore a
"meeting" pursuant to §1-200(2), G.S.”

51. Was there a meeting under the FOI Act?

52. What about the notice
and the minutes?
See cheat sheet.

53. Marlin James Lively
v.
Mary Moran, Chairman, Police Commission,
Town of Trumbull; John Riordan; James
McNamara; Lino Constantini; David Wilson, as
members, Police Commission, Town of
Trumbull; and Police Commission, Town of
Trumbull
Docket #FIC 2002-008

54.  Facts
◦ The Mr. Lively and the Police Commission were parties
in a lawsuit which was pending at all times relevant to
the complaint.
◦ The Police Commission held a regular meeting
December 21, 2001 which Mr. Lively and his attorney
attended.
◦ Prior to the meeting, Mr. Lively was verbally informed
that his job performance would be discussed in
executive session and he did not object at that time.
◦ When the executive session was called, the
complainant did not object to the session.

55.  Facts cont.
◦ The Police Commission discussed the lawsuit and the
complainant’s job performance in executive session.
◦ The Police Commission voted to place the Mr. Lively
on administrative leave.
◦ The minutes of the meeting were made available six
days after the meeting.
◦ The minutes did not record the votes to convene in
the executive sessions.

56. What right was allegedly violated?
§1-225(a)
The meetings of all public agencies…shall be
open to the public...

57. The Police Commission’s Defense
SEE…
1-200(6)(A) – Personnel Matters
1-200(6)(B) – Pending Litigation
and
1-231(a) – Attendance is limited

58. Was the executive session
proper?

59. What about the minutes and the
recording of the votes?

60. See 1-225(a)
The votes of each member of any such public
agency …shall be reduced to writing and
made available for public inspection within
forty-eight hours and shall also be recorded
in the minutes of the session at which
taken.

61. Any questions?

62. Practice Skit

63.  Comprised of nine members appointed to
staggered terms; five appointed by Governor, four
appointed by legislature leadership
 No more than five members can be members of the
same political party

64.  Mediate, hear and decide citizen complaints
 Issue declaratory rulings
 Public education and training of public officials
 FOI Commission staff represents the Commission
in court
 Makes recommendations to the legislature

65.  Order the disclosure of public records
 Declare null and void votes taken at meetings
held in violation of the FOI Act
 Fine the responsible public officials for violation
of the FOI Act without reasonable grounds
 Fine people who bring meritless FOI complaints
frivolously, without reasonable grounds and
solely for the purpose of harassment

66.  Clearly written letter of complaint (appeal) to the
Commission (enclose request letter and any other
documents relevant to the request)
 File complaint with FOI Commission within 30 days
after denial of any right conferred by the FOI Act to
avoid loss of subject matter jurisdiction.

67. The Ombudsman Program
 Form of mediation
 Attempt to reach amicable resolution, acceptable to
all parties, of complaints
 Discussions are confidential, no carryover to
hearing if negotiations are not successful
 Ombudsman may not discuss case with Hearing
Officer
 Settlements can include: narrowing of issues,
partial release of requested records or release of
redacted records, written admission of FOI mistake,
scheduling of FOI workshops by Commission staff

68.  Contested case hearings are 90 minutes.
 Non-formal proceeding, however,
preparation is important.
 No lawyer required
 Testimony, exhibits and arguments are
presented
 Recommendations, called hearing officer
reports, submitted to all parties and the
Commission.
 Commission makes final decision at a
meeting.

69. The Commission Meeting
◦ 10 minutes of legal argument permitted to each
party.
◦ Time should be used to advocate for or against the
hearing officer’s report.
◦ No testimony or fact-finding permitted.
◦ Commission may accept the hearing officer’s
report, reject it, or change it.

70. Q&A

71. Thank you for attending!