Attorney General's Seal
Attorney General's Opinions


Attorney General Matt Denn


          

  Archived Posts From: 2008

08-IB05 RE: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Town of Middletown

Written on: February 22nd, 2008 in 10001 Declaration of Policy

Complainants alleged Town violated FOIA open records and open meeting requirements regarding payment of employee bonuses where they received no document responsive to their request for methodology in calculating and authorizing payments. They further assert that benefits should have been approved at public meeting. Town asserts that it has no written policy governing amount of bonuses and when and if they are given out. It has only a line item in its budget for “Employee Benefits – Other” from which Middletown paid the bonuses. HELD: FOIA does not require a public body to create a document in order to respond to a FOIA request. The Middletown Mayor is a body of one and, therefore, is not subject to FOIA’s open meeting requirement pursuant to 29 Del. C. §10004(h)(6).


Read More

08-IB04 RE: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Delaware State University

Written on: February 20th, 2008 in 10002(g) Meeting

Complainant alleged that DSU Board violated FOIA open meeting requirements in noticing and conducting a meeting via teleconference. Agenda was timely posted and reflected that meeting would be conducted via teleconference, but did not state the place where meeting would be held. Board by-laws permit board meetings by teleconference. HELD: DSU Board violated FOIA when it noticed meeting by not including the place where meeting would be held. DSU Board did not violate FOIA because by-laws expressly permit board meetings by teleconference.


Read More

08-IB03 Re: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Kent County Levy Court

Written on: February 20th, 2008 in 10002(g) Meeting

Complainant alleged Levy Court violated FOIA open meeting requirements by holding series of meetings with County planning staff and members of working group without notice to the public. Levy Court admitted that series of meetings were held but asserts they were not subject to FOIA because a quorum was not present. The Levy Court further admitted that meetings were planned in advance to build a consensus on updating County’s comprehensive Plan in a way that the commissioners were not “on stage” and felt the need to talk to crowds. HELD: Levy Court violated FOIA when all seven members met privately in a series of five subquorum meetings without notice to the public. The nature, timing and substance of those communications amounted to meeting of a constructive quorum without notice to the public.


Read More





Navigation



Adjust Your Font Size


Make Text Size Smaler Reset Text Size Make Text Size Bigger




+