Although many reporters
have acquired databases for stories in Connecticut, one issue that journalists
there have confronted for years is high fees for records. When a reporter for
the Hartford Courant made a request under Connecticut’s Freedom
of Information Act to the Department of Public Safety for an electronic copy
of information in the state’s criminal history records, the department
denied the request, claiming that it lacked the technology to gather the information
electronically and would have to write a new computer program to be able to
generate it. Alternatively, the department explained, it could charge the newspaper
$25 per record to have its employees search each one of the 815,000 records
in its database. The only good news for reporters seeking data is that any new
computer systems purchased by agencies are supposed to designed to promote public
access to the information.
The law. The
Freedom of Information Act defines a public record as “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 . . . typed, tape-recorded,
. . . or recorded by any other method.” Conn. Gen. Stat. § 1-18a(d)
(1997). The law requires an agency that maintains its records in a computer
storage system to provide printouts of any data properly identified. Agencies
must provide public information in the format requested, including computer
tape or diskettes. § 1-211
Any public agency
that maintains public records in a computer storage system shall provide, to
any person making a request pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, a copy
of any nonexempt data contained in such records, properly identified, 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.
§ 1-211
After July 1, 1992, before any public agency acquires any computer system, equipment
or software to store or retrieve nonexempt public records, it must consider
whether such proposed system, equipment or software adequately provides for
the rights of the public under the Freedom of Information Act at the least cost
possible to the agency.
Cases & opinions. In Connecticut, the state’s Freedom of Information Commission administers and enforces the provisions of the Connecticut Freedom of Information Act. The commission issues opinions on public records and public meetings issues.
A state agency
must provide electronic copies of public information in its criminal conviction
records and may not charge a prohibitively high fee to do so, Connecticut’s
highest court has ruled. In the Courant case, the newspaper filed a complaint
with the state Freedom of Information Commission, which ruled that it could
not obtain the records unless it paid the fee. A state trial court upheld the
decision. The Courant appealed, and the Connecticut Supreme Court reversed.
Hartford Courant Co. v. Freedom of Information Commission, 801 A.2d 759
Conn., 2002 (July 23, 2003)
Where a newspaper
wanted copies of computer tapes and was willing to pay for software to excise
confidential information, the Freedom of Information Commission has authority
to order an agency to prepare excised tapes, the state supreme court ruled.
However, the court found that the commission had failed to show that release
in that case would not invade personal privacy. Maher v. FOIC, 472 A.2d
321 (Conn. 1984).
A trial court ruled that the commission could order an agency to copy diskettes
for a requester if it needed no additional software to make the duplicates.
The court said the FOIC could order the release of software to access data on
the diskettes. Although the act requires agencies to provide printouts of computer
records, it does not limit release of electronic records to that format. Comm’n
on Hospitals and Health Care v. FOIC, No. CV88-346502-S (Hartford/New Britain
Super. Ct., Jan. 29, 1990).
An amendment to
the Freedom of Information Act invalidated a state appellate court ruling that
a government agency did not have to release information in the format requested,
but had to provide only paper copies. Chapin v. Freedom of Information Commission,
580 A.2d 56 (Conn. App. Ct. 1990).
The Secretary of
State’s Office may charge the full cost of maintaining a voter roll to
someone requesting only part of the file. “It is found that pursuant to
§1-212(b)(4), G.S., the respondent may charge the complainants the full
amount of $1,700, which is the lesser cost of providing the names of registered
voters to the complainants. (FIC 2001-053, Oct. 24, 2001)
The Town of Greenwich
must provide a requester with copies of GIS backup tapes and SQL server databases
relating to the GIS data. The city may redact medical information from the files.
FIC 2001-546 (Nov. 13, 2002)
A requester sought
land records on diskette from the town of New Milford. The city alleged that
they were required to provide only a computer printout of the information. But
according to FIC findings, the city must comply with the request according to
Conn. Gen. Stat. § §§1-15 and 1-19(a). FIC 87-192 (Dec. 9, 1987)
Fees.
Charges for copies “shall not exceed the cost . . . to the public agency.”
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 1-15(b). The fee for a copy other than a printout may
include compensation for agency employees who must format or program computers
to provide the copy as requested. The fee may include the cost to the agency
of hiring an outside electronic copying service, and the “actual cost of
storage devices or media.” The fee may not include search or retrieval
costs, unless the agency incurs computer-time charges in providing the requested
record. §§ 1-15(b), 1-19.
E-mail. The Electronic and Voice-mail Management and Retention Guide For State and Municipal Government Employees issued by the Office of the Public Records Administrator and State Archives states that e-mail messages and voice mail messages sent or received in the conduct of public business are public records.