10-IB03 RE: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Ocean View
Complainant asserts that town violated FOIA open meetings requirements related to (1) adequacy of notice of executive session on agenda; 92) exclusion of town manager from executive session and (3) whether matters discussed were appropriate for executive session. The agenda listed “Executive Session to Discuss Contract and Personnel Issues.” Complainant asserts that he believed the executive session topic related to the town manager employment contract. However, the executive session related to the Chief of Police contract. Agenda does not have to give full explanation of topics or names when confidential personnel matters will be discussed. HELD: Notice was adequate, employment contract negotiation matters are appropriate subject for executive session and FOIA does not address whether Counsel can exclude town manager from executive session.
Read More10-IB02 01/25/10 FOIA Opinion Letter to Ms. McCoy re: FOIA Complaint Concerning the Town of Bethel
Complainant asserts that Town violated FOIA open meetings requirements when it held executive session to discuss subdivision applications. Town’s agenda properly posted and noticed the executive session but did not state the purpose. Town asserted that executive session was for purpose of receiving legal advice. After going into executive session and receiving legal advice, the Council discussed the applications for about an hour and voted on the applications before coming out of executive session. They re-voted at the public continued public meeting. Meeting minutes did not reflect legal advice. HELD: Executive Session was held for the proper purpose of receiving legal advice. However, Council violated FOIA by not listing the purpose of the executive session on the agenda, discussing applications during executive session and not properly reflecting legal advice in minutes.
Read More10-IB01 RE: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against City of Wilmington
Complainant asserts City violated FOIA’s open records requirements by denying FOIA request for documents relating to the City Water Department on the basis of “potential litigation.” City asserted that conversations with Complainant made City believe Complainant would file suit against the City as the documents are released. City provided no other reasons for FOIA denial. HELD: City violated FOIA because they provided no evidence of a “realistic and tangible threat of litigation” characterized by objective factors in support of the FOIA denial.
Read More09-IB10 RE: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Town of Dewey Beach
Complainant asserts Town violated FOIA by privately (i) discussing whether to accept certain funds from DelDot; (ii) going into executive session to discuss transferring capital improvement funds to a litigation defense fund; and (iii) refusing to permit public comment at public meeting/ Town asserts (i) Town Manager and not Town Commission has authority to determine whether to accept funds and that Town Manager’s request for individual input from Commissioners does not constitute private meetings in violation of FOIA; (ii) executive session was properly noticed and for a proper purpose; (iii) Mayor’s refusal to accept public comment at meeting did not violate FOIA; HELD: (i) FOIA does not apply to Town Manager who had authority to accept or reject DelDot Funds; (ii) executive session was properly noticed and discussion of litigation resources was proper for executive session; (iii) FOIA provides no right for the public to speak at a public meeting.
Read More09-IB07 RE: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Town of Smyrna
Complainant asserts Smyrna violated FOIA’s open records requirements by not providing copies of records of the Town Ethics Commission concerning a complaint against him. Town provided notes from two meetings but provided no other records. Town asserts, among other things, that Smyrna’s Code of Conduct provides for the confidentiality of the Ethics Committee’s records and that the complaint is exempt from FOIA as a record specifically exempted from disclosure by statute or common law. HELD: Smyrna did not violate FOIA because Town’s Code of Conduct provided FOIA exemption by statute.
Read More09-IB06 RE: Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) Complaint Against Townsend, Delaware
Complainant asserts that Townsend violated FOIA’s open records requirements by not providing a copy of complaint asserted against her family and because the Mayor had promised her a copy. Townsend asserts that the complaint is exempt from FOIA because it is part of an investigatory file. HELD: Townsend did not violate FOIA by not providing the complaint. Townsend has a public interest in preserving confidentiality of law enforcement files to avoid a chilling effect on those who might bring pertinent information to the attention of law enforcement. Doctrine of estoppel does not apply because even if the Mayor did promise a copy of the letter, Complainant did not rely on that promise to his detriment.
Read More09-IB04 RE: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Sussex County
Complainant asserts that County violated FOIA by charging an unreasonable amount for copies of text messages and emails which constitute approximately 1,180 pages. County requested a fee of $354 for paper copies and $227.12 for electronic copies on CD. HELD: Charge was reasonable and reasonably calculated.
Read More09-IB03 RE: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Sussex County
Complainant asserts that County violated FOIA by charging an unreasonable amount for copies of text messages and emails which constitute approximately 1,180 pages. County requested a fee of $354 for paper copies and $227.12 for electronic copies on CD. County also charged another person same amount for same FOIA request. HELD: Charge was reasonable and reasonably calculated. However, County cannot charge for both requests unless it incurs duplicate costs for retrieval.
Read More09-IB01 Re: Delaware State Fire School Records
Senator Ennis asked whether the training records for courses taken at the Delaware State Fire School are public records subject to FOIA. HELD: Yes. The State Fire School is a public body subject to FOIA. The records do not constitute personnel or pupil records exempt from FOIA nor do they contain information which, if released, would result in invasion of privacy. However, personal information such as home addresses and social security numbers may be redacted.
Read More08-IB14: RE: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Sussex County
Complainant alleged Sussex County violated FOIA by charging an unreasonable amount for copying records. Request was for electronic media download of current real property assessment date. County originally requested a flat fee of $12,000 then modified the charge to $3,000. County regulations allow $.30 per page for copies or “actual cost of reproduction” for records not subject to routine photocopying. County asserts that the information requested is made up of approximately 4 million records. HELD: County improperly equated each record with a copy. A record is not the same as a page. Electronic data cannot be charged on an arbitrary per record basis that has no relationship to the actual cost of reproduction.
Read More
