Written on: March 28th, 2017 in 10001 Declaration of Policy
Petitioner alleged that the Sussex County Board of Adjustment violated FOIA by not permitting him to comment at a meeting that included public comment in the agenda. The Board contended that agenda item was added only to permit a county employee to speak about his retirement. HELD: All members of the public were treated equally during the public comment session, so the Board did not violate FOIA when it did not permit Mr. Reiger’s comment. The Board did violate FOIA by including public comment on the agenda when they did not intend to allow it. No remediation is warranted, though the Board was encouraged to pursue FOIA training.
Written on: March 21st, 2017 in 10001 Declaration of Policy
Petitioner alleged that the Delaware State Police violated FOIA by improperly redacting purchase orders. HELD: Consistent with this office’s March 4, 2016 opinion regarding the same records, we request that DSP review the redactions and either provide Petitioner copies without the redactions of that information or provide the bases for such redactions. Petitioner also alleged that the scope of DSP’s search for requested records was insufficient. HELD: Consistent with this office’s March 4, 2016 opinion, no FOIA violation has been found.
Written on: March 10th, 2017 in 10001 Declaration of Policy
Petitioner alleged that the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) denied his request for emails to and from the Officer of the Governor and DNREC Secretary and Assistant Secretary referencing a possible violation of a DNREC Secretary order. HELD: Because the records sought relate to an investigation, the records are exempt from FOIA’s definition of “public record.” As such, DNREC did not violate FOIA by denying the Petitioner’s request.
Written on: March 8th, 2017 in 10001 Declaration of Policy
Petitioner alleged that the Town of Middletown violated FOIA by not answering questions regarding the source of certain funds paid out by the Town and by not providing certain records relating to a 2002 real estate transaction. HELD: FOIA does not require a public body to respond to questions. Moreover, the Town performed an adequate search of its own records and there is no evidence to suggest that an existing third party has possession of responsive records over which the Town has control. The Town therefore did not violate FOIA as alleged.