This author wrote previously on the status of sexual harassment investigations under the Freedom of Information Act ['FOIA']. In a case that has grabbed some notoriety; the Freedom of Information Commission ['FOIC'] has offered further guidance and reminders as to the public nature of sexual harassment complaints.
In Wotjas v. Department of Administrative Services, Town of Stonington, #FIC 2013-558 (July 23, 2014), a citizen requested a copy of a sexual harassment complaint made by a former Town of Stonington employee against the First Selectman, along with any correspondence that the complaining employee had with the Town about her reason for departure. The Town denied the request, asserting (among other things) that the complaining employee had been notified and objected to the disclosure of these records.
After a complaint was filed, the FOIC issued a decision ordering disclosure of the requested documents. The FOIC rejected the Town's claim that the requested records were exempt from disclosure pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes ß1-210(b)(2), which provides that disclosure is not required of 'personne' or medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute an invasion of personal privacy.î The FOIC rejected an assertion that a privacy right for the First Selectman existed in light of the unsubstantiated nature of the allegations, and concluded that there is a legitimate public interest in the behavior of public officials in relation to public employees, whether or not reasonable minds might differ as to whether such behavior constitutes harassment. Continue>>>
======