Delaware.gov logo
Listen to this page using ReadSpeaker

Delaware Department of Justice
Attorney General
Kathy Jennings




 Archived Posts From:  October 2017

17-IB57 10/24/2017 FOIA Opinion Letter to Mr. Randall Chase re: FOIA Complaint Concerning the State Aid to Local Law Enforcement Committee

Petitioner alleged that the State Aid to Local Law Enforcement Committee (SALLE) violated FOIA by noticing an intent to convene an executive session for an improper purpose. The SALLE had noticed an intent to convene an executive session to discuss the contents of non-public documents; specifically, investigatory files. DECIDED: The SALLE noticed a proper purpose for an executive session and there was no evidence that the discussion itself was improper or exceeded the scope of the permissible purpose. The SALLE met with an investigator to discuss the status of an active investigation into potential misappropriation or misuse of funds, which includes a review of applications and related documentation.

Read More



17-IB56 10/12/2017 FOIA Opinion Letter to Cpl. Brandon Dunning re: FOIA Complaint Concerning the Town of Smyrna

Petitioner alleged that his request for documents related to an investigation was improperly denied in part. DECIDED: The record denied to Petitioner was properly denied because it is exempt from public disclosure under the attorney work-product doctrine pursuant to 29 Del. C. § 10002(1)(6).

Read More



17-IB55 10/11/2017 FOIA Opinion Letter to Mr. Albert Porach re: FOIA Complaint Concerning the City of Newark

Petitioner alleged that the Council violated FOIA by failing to provide seven days’ notice of its September 18, 2017 meeting and that a special meeting was unjustified. DECIDED: This Office was satisfied that the City met its notice obligations by providing an explanation as to why seven days’ notice could not be given and, to the extent FOIA requires exigency or compelling need to justify a special meeting, the City satisfied this burden.

Read More



17-IB54 10/10/2017 FOIA Opinion Letter to Councilman Samuel Guy re: FOIA Complaint Concerning the City of Wilmington Council Organization Commission

Petitioner alleged that the City of Wilmington Council Organization Commission was a public body which failed to comply with the open meetings requirements of FOIA. DECIDED: The Commission was a public body. As such, to the extent the Commission did not comply with FOIA’s open meetings requirements, it violated FOIA. This Office recommends as remediation that the Commission make minutes of all prior meetings available for inspection and copying. To the extent no meeting minutes exist, we recommend that the Commission create them.

Read More



17-IB53 10/10/2017 FOIA Opinion Letter to Mr. Vincenzo Macrino re: FOIA Complaint Concerning The Delaware Department of Correction

Petitioner alleged that the Department of Correction improperly denied his request for the records of the background investigation performed pursuant to his employment application. DECIDED: No FOIA violation found, as the requested records are investigatory files compiled for civil law-enforcement purposes, which are exempt from FOIA and thus not considered public records.

Read More



17-IB52 10/9/2017 FOIA Opinion Letter to Mr. Kevin Ohlandt re: FOIA Complaint Concerning DelTech Community College

Petitioner requested that this Office determine whether certain Del Tech entities are public bodies subject to FOIA. DECIDED: The Collegewide Criminal Justice Advisory Board was determined to be a public body. This Office recommends minutes of its January 13, 2017 meeting be made available to the public and that the Board comply with the public records and open meetings requirements of FOIA going forward. The College Educational Foundation is not a public body; however, if a quorum of the Board of Trustees, as members of that Foundation, is present at a meeting and public business is discussed, such meetings should be considered a meeting of the Board of Trustees and must comply with FOIA. No other entity named in the complaint was found to be a public body.

Read More



17-IB51 10/9/2017 FOIA Opinion Letter to Ms. Amy Cherry re: FOIA Complaint Concerning New Castle County Council

Petitioner alleged that New Castle County Council improperly denied her request for certain emails involving county business or to certain employees sent from the Council President’s personal email account. DECIDED: This Office determined that the Council violated FOIA by providing by failing to provide a timely response to the request and by denying the request in its entirety. We recommended that the Council collect and review records consistent with this Office’s determination and provide all non-exempt records within 10 business days of the determination.

Read More



17-IB50 10/6/2017 FOIA Opinion Letter to Ms. Dell Tush re: FOIA Complaint Concerning The Town of Dewey Beach

Petitioner alleged that the Town of Dewey Beach violated FOIA by failing to post notice of certain meetings at least seven days in advance DECIDED: Any question regarding compliance with respect to cancelled meetings is moot. The September 13 agenda sufficiently noticed a permissible purpose for executive session. As we determined in Attorney General Opinion No. 17-49, the Town’s conduct with respect to timely notice of the September 13 meeting was, at most, a technical violation for which no remediation is warranted. Finally, the Town provided timely notice of its September 22 meeting.

Read More



17-IB49 9/29/2017 FOIA Opinion Letter to Mr. Richard Cross re: FOIA Complaint Concerning The Town of Dewey Beach

Petitioner alleged that the Town of Dewey Beach violated FOIA by failing to post notice of certain meetings at least seven days in advance and that the noticed purposes for the executive sessions of those meetings were inadequate. DECIDED: Any question regarding compliance with respect to cancelled meetings is moot. The September 13 agenda sufficiently noticed a permissible purpose for executive session. The Town’s conduct with respect to timely notice of the September 13 meeting was, at most, a technical violation for which no remediation is warranted.

Read More






+