DERBY — Derby government needs to take a refresher course about the Freedom of Information Act.
The city also needs to come up with a simple written policy that gives guidance to employees who receive information requests from the public.
They need to do this not because I say so. They need to do this because they promised to do this three years ago.
It is time for Derby government to live up to its word.
Background
In 2019, a former Derby building inspector, in an attempt to shield the owner of a dangerous building from public scrutiny, declined to release a letter about the unsafe building to The Valley Independent Sentinel.
The building inspector, who was still relatively new at the time, seemed to lack knowledge of the state’s Freedom of Information Act. This is often the case with new employees who have not worked in the public sector before. It is why the state’s Freedom of Information Commission provides free seminars to go over the rules with local officials.
In that 2019 Derby building inspector case, The Valley Indy filed a FOI complaint (based on the building inspector’s lack of response to a FOI request) against the city.
The Valley Indy agreed to withdraw the complaint after the city attorney, acting on behalf of city government, promised three things:
1. To release the document (which happened)
2. “To prepare and produce a written policy on FOIA responses to ensure timely responses in the future“
3. “To schedule an FOIA seminar over the summer (of 2019) and compel the attendance of staff“
The city, to my knowledge, never followed through on its promise to come up with a written policy on FOI requests, nor did city hall staff attend a FOI seminar that summer. I was told that the building inspector, and the building inspector alone, attended a workshop.
Now, I understand that we’ve been through COVID, inflation, that bad Morbius movie, and that we’re all working our fingers to the bone just to stay afloat. I also understand that we all have to-do lists that are far too long, and that we have kids, families, personal lives, stink bug infestations, and other challenges we’re facing that are far more important than a public records request from a tiny online news publication.
But, to be blunt, it is getting weird in Derby.
Can I Get That Letter You’re Talking About?
On Tuesday morning I learned the city’s finance director had allegedly submitted a letter of resignation. This was confirmed through email by the mayor’s chief of staff, and verbally through a telephone call with the finance director.
Two independent verifications are wonderful for local news reporting.
However, I also wanted to see the actual letter of resignation. I wanted to see this letter because a previous letter of resignation by a previous Derby finance director was called fraudulent — and it resulted in a lawsuit funded by taxpayers.
Since 2009 I can’t recall waiting more than an hour or so for such a document from city halls in Ansonia, Derby, Oxford, Seymour or Shelton.
Tuesday was different, and I hope the experience outlined below demonstrates why training and a policy is needed in Derby.
Rounding The Bases
Nine hours ago (as of this writing) I asked Mayor Dziekan’s chief of staff, Walt Mayhew, for a copy of the resignation letter. Mayhew was the person who told me the letter existed, so I asked him for it. But he said he didn’t have it. He said the city’s human resources director might have it.
I don’t know who the human resources director is in Derby. I could not find any contact information on the city’s website. I couldn’t find any contact information from a basic Google search.
Derby Town/City Clerk Marc Garofalo provided me with an email address for human resources, so I sent an email to a generic sounding “HR” at Derby.gov email address.
I also asked Garofalo for a copy of the resignation letter — but he said no one had given his office a copy. In previous years in Derby (from 2009 on), a resignation letter would be filed with the town clerk, and I would go to the town clerk for the document. I don’t know why that doesn’t seem to be happening anymore.
Continuing my quest for a routine public document, I emailed the Derby corporation counsel — twice. I also emailed the mayor and asked for the letter of resignation.
You can probably guess — I still don’t have the letter. It’s 6 p.m. Tuesday.
There’s nothing in state law that says Derby has to drop everything they’re doing to help me. There’s nothing that says “give the local press guy” instant access to documents.
But a problem is that Derby’s lack of procedure put the onus on me, a member of the public, to figure out where my request should go. It was a guessing game that allowed everyone to pass the buck.
There Has To Be A Better Way
The city should designate, in a written policy, a person to receive FOI requests.
Is it the chief of staff? Is it the lawyer? Is it the town clerk? Is it the mayor’s office? Is it the human resources department? Who does the public ask? How long will it take to be acknowledged?
The current practice leaves too much room for shenanigans.
If a FOI request goes to employee A, but the request from the public should have gone to employee B — isn’t it employee A’s responsibility to forward the request to employee B?
That’s not what happened today. Instead, the request was bounced back to me. It was my responsibility to navigate Derby’s bureaucracy and resubmit a request.
That’s not how FOI requests are supposed to be handled.
If a city government receives a request for information, it is up to the city government to comply with the request. They have to figure it out.
Bouncing the request back to the person making the request is not complying with the FOI Act.
Too Busy?
Now, Derby isn’t the worst with FOI requests by any stretch of the imagination.
I have a complaint pending against West Haven for taking 130 days to acknowledge a FOI request (town/cities are supposed to at least ‘acknowledge’ FOI requests within four days).
West Haven admitted the mistake, saying my request fell through the cracks, and they produced a bunch of documents — so the hearing officer at the FOI Commission seemed confused as to why I was still pressing for some type of action from the full FOI Commission against West Haven.
It made me feel like I was wasting everyone’s time.
Welp, tough. The last time I settled a FOI complaint I got played — by my own hometown.
The FOI Act exists, and it’s easy to comply with, if government officials have the desire to do so.
At the end of the day, the FOI Act in Connecticut is mostly useless because — surprise, surprise — the government that created the law failed to include a deadline by which documents must be released by the government.
So if you have a local government that lacks shame, or thinks they know better, they will drag things on without remorse or accountability.
I don’t think the Derby government is like that — yet. Derby government is badly understaffed and has been for years. I get it. Suddenly getting demands for info is annoying.
But my experience today concerned me, so I have decided to explain myself.
As the day progressed, I was told the human resource person, whom I was directed to send my request, is only available one day a week. I have no idea if that’s true, as I don’t work in City Hall, but it adds more fog to the FOI situation.
Finally, at one point today I was told in a text message that a city employee in Derby was just too busy to “chase things down” for me. That’s concerning, because we’re not talking about someone asking for a favor — we’re talking about public officials complying with state law.
I mean, if that doesn’t scream “Derby needs a FOI refresher course and a FOI request policy,” nothing does.