47 Conn. Supp. 309 | Conn. Super. Ct. | 2001
The appeal of the FOIC order was timely filed and, after briefs were submitted, the court heard oral argument on January 3, 2001.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On March 2, 1999, Barbara Brennan, an insurance investigator, went to the city of Bridgeport tax assessor's office and asked to inspect the motor vehicle grand list books for 1997 and 1998. The tax assessor's office denied Brennan's request on the grounds that the tax assessor is prohibited from disclosing motor vehicle information contained in such lists pursuant to the Federal Drivers Privacy Protection Act,
A contested administrative hearing was held on May 20, 1999, before hearing officer Colleen M. Murphy. On July 14, 1999, the FOIC held a hearing on Murphy's amended proposed final decision. The FOIC affirmed Murphy's proposed final decision and, on July 22, 1999, it issued a notice of final decision finding the tax assessor violated General CT Page 5741-dw Statutes §
The facts underlying this case are essentially undisputed. The tax assessor challenges the final decision of the FOIC on the legal ground that they improperly concluded that neither the FDPPA nor General Statutes §§
JURISDICTION
The tax assessor is adversely affected by the decision of the FOIC in that she is faced with either complying with the FDPPA and §§
The tax assessor is aggrieved and has standing to appeal.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The FOIC is an administrative agency; see General Statutes §
The ultimate determination is whether, in view of all of the evidence, the agency, in issuing its orders, acted unreasonably, arbitrarily, illegally or in abuse of its discretion. See Domestic Violence Servicesof Greater New Haven, Inc. v. Freedom of Information Commission,
DISCUSSION
In its final decision, the FOIC concluded that neither the FDPPA nor §§
The essence of this appeal is a challenge to the FOIC's conclusions of law concerning application to the tax assessor of the FDPPA and §
The FDPPA "regulates the disclosure of personal information contained in the records of state motor vehicle departments." Reno v Condon,
Section 2721(a) of the FDPPA provides in relevant part: [e]xcept as provided in subsection (b), a State department of motor vehicles, and anyofficer, employee, or contractor, thereof, shall not knowingly disclose or otherwise make available to any person or entity personal information about any individual obtained by the department in connection with a motor vehicle record. (Emphasis added.)
Sections
Neither the FDPPA nor §
Moreover, § 2721(b)(1) of the FDPPA permits disclosure of personal information by a state department of motor vehicles and any officer, employee, or contractor, thereof "for use by any government agency incarrying out its functions." (Emphasis added.) Section
Section
Section
Section
General Statutes §
The tax assessor contended to the FOIC that she is the custodian of the records provided to her by the commissioner of motor vehicles and, as custodian, is prohibited from disclosing them. That contention is not supported by the facts or the law. As the hearing officer rightfully found, the assessor is not the legal custodian of the department of motor vehicle records, but rather is given such records annually to compile a motor vehicle grand list each year pursuant to §
The tax assessor also contends that the phrases "except as otherwise specially provided by law" in §
CONCLUSION
The FOIC has correctly concluded that neither the FDPPA nor §§
Accordingly, the appeal of tax assessor is dismissed.
Lois Tanzer, Judge