Written on: September 28th, 2010 in 10002(a) Agenda
Complainant asserts that County violated FOIA open meetings requirements by identifying roads under consideration on agenda by number instead of name and by sometimes moving away from microphones at meetings and out of the hearing of the public. HELD: County’s identification of roads by numbers on agenda does not violate FOIA. The agendas adequately draw the public’s attention to the fact that a specific important subject will be treated. There is no evidence that board members knowingly avoided public monitoring of meetings by moving away from the microphones at meetings.
Written on: September 8th, 2010 in 10001 Declaration of Policy, 10004(b)(4) Executive Session Collective Bargaining/Litigation, 10004(c) Requirements to Meet in Executive Session, 10004(f) Minutes Requirements
Complainant asserts Town violated FOIA open meeting requirements with respect to certain executive sessions regarding draft minutes, lack of video recording, lack of reason for executive session on agenda’s. HELD: FOIA does not require draft minutes or video recording. Town concedes that official minutes did not include reason for executive session and concedes that two agenda’s did not include reason for executive session. Town took remedial action by conducting properly noticed meetings and amending minutes.
Written on: September 8th, 2010 in 10002(l) (6) Exemptions - Records Exempted Per Statute or Common Law
Complainant asserts that School District violated FOIA open records requirements by not providing copies of settlement agreement and related documents. School District asserts, among other things, that settlement and related school records are “educational records” that are confidential under both state and federal law. HELD: Family Educational and Privacy Act (“FERPA”) and FOIA provides that educational records may not be disclosed unless the parents consent. The District did not request the parents consent. If the parents do not consent, the documents should be submitted to the DOJ to determine whether they should be released or remain confidential.
Written on: September 2nd, 2010 in 10002(l) (1) Exemptions - Personnel
Complainant asserts that DelDot violated FOIA open records requirements when it redacted names/addresses from individuals who made public comments related to the US 113 North-South Study. DelDot argued the names/addresses were redacted for reasons of personal privacy. HELD: DelDOT must release the names/addresses. Delaware has not created a per se right to privacy in one’s name/address. There is no federal or Delaware statute that applies to names/addresses of individuals who voluntarily make comments to a public agency.