07-IB05 Re: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Town of Bridgeville
The Complainant alleged the Town of Bridgeville (the “Town”) violated the “open records” provision of the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) by conditioning production of requested documents on the Complainant’s payment of $11,383, despite the Town’s lack of a written, uniform FOIA fee schedule. Held: the Town violated the public records requirements of FOIA by conditioning your access to public records on the payment of $11,383 in initial labor costs to retrieve and compile the records because the Town did not have a written, uniform FOIA cost schedule as of the date of the request.
Read More07-IB04 RE: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Delaware State University
The Complainant alleged the Board of Trustees of Delaware State University (“the Board of Trustees”) violated the “open meetings” provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, 29 Del. C. Ch. 100 (“FOIA”), by meeting for dinner at a private club without notice to the public. Held: the Board of Trustees did not violate the open meeting requirements of FOIA when seven appointed and elected members of the Board (less than a quorum) gathered for dinner at a private club.
Read More07-IB03: Re: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Town of Cheswold
The Complainant alleged the Town Council of Cheswold (the “Council”) violated the “open meetings” provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) by: (a) meeting on without adequate notice to the public in the agenda to discuss changing the basis for property tax assessments; and (b) meeting without adequate notice to the public in the agenda to rescind an earlier resolution to forgive real estate taxes to elderly citizens if those citizens were exempt from Kent County taxes. Held: (a) the Council violated the open meeting requirements of FOIA by failing to alert the public that it would discuss changing the basis for property tax assessments; and (b) the Council did not rescind an earlier resolution at the meeting in question — it merely amended the minutes of an earlier meeting to accurately reflect that the Council did not resolve to reinstate a property tax exemption for the elderly.
Read More07-IB02 RE: Application Of The Freedom Of Information Act To The Courts
The Complainant, Senator Karen E. Peterson, asked whether the public record requirements of the Delaware Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), apply to the courts of the State of Delaware. Held: the General Assembly intended to exclude the judiciary from the application of FOIA. The language of FOIA demonstrates a legislative intent to respect the independence of the judiciary as a separate, co-equal branch of government and the judiciary’s right to control access to its records and proceedings by court rule.
Read More07-IB01 Re: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Town of Milton
The Complainant, Senator Karen E. Peterson, asked whether the public record requirements of the Delaware Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), apply to the courts of the State of Delaware. Held: the General Assembly intended to exclude the judiciary from the application of FOIA. The language of FOIA demonstrates a legislative intent to respect the independence of the judiciary as a separate, co-equal branch of government and the judiciary’s right to control access to its records and proceedings by court rule.
Read More06-IB25: RE Freedom of Information Act Against University of Delaware
Complainant alleged that the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees of the University of Delaware violated FOIA by meeting to approve the election of a new president without giving notice to the public as required by FOIA. The University responded that FOIA only applies to full board of Trustees meetings. Therefore, the Committee was under no duty under FOIA to open its meetings to the public. HELD: The Committee did not violate the open meeting requirements of FOIA because the Committee is not a “public body” as defined by FOIA. Rather, only the full Board of Trustees is a “public body” for purposes of FOIA.
Read More06-IB24 – RE: Freedom of Information Complaint Against Camden-Wyoming Sewer & Water Authority
Complainant alleged that the Camden-Wyoming Sewer & Water Authority violated the public record requirements of FOIA when it failed to provide the “total amount of monies expended in the research, filing and pursuit” of litigation failed by the Authority against the Town of Camden. The Authority responded by providing a copy of the stipulated settlement agreement and order. The authority’s attorney also responded by noting that she did not separately bill the authority for time spent on the lawsuit and that no separate record of billing for the matter existed. HELD: The Authority did not violate FOIA because it did not have in its custody an accounting of the costs of legal counsel in the litigation, and FOIA does not require the Authority to prepare such an accounting.
Read More06-IB21 Re: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Wilmington Housing Authority
Complainant alleged that the Wilmington Housing Authority violated the public records requirements of FOIA by failing to disclose “all reports, studies and documents” pertaining to an apartment building fire. The Authority declined the request, stating that the records were exempt from disclosure due to the pending or potential litigation exemption. HELD: Potential or pending litigation exemption not applicable because there was no evidence in the record to suggest that complainant or The News Journal was attempting to use FOIA to obtain information as a prelude to a lawsuit against the Authority.
Read More06-IB20: Re Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Christina School District Board of Education
Complainant alleged that the Christina School District Board of Education violated the open meeting requirements of FOIA by meeting twice in private at an open meeting to discuss matters of public business without notice to the public. HELD: The facts show that, collectively, five Board members participated in the two meetings with the Superintendent to discuss reductions in force and tax warrants. This amounted to a constructive quorum for purposes of FOIA because the meetings were scheduled only a few hours apart, the subjects discussed were the same, and the School Board acknowledges the meetings went beyond the mere passive receipt of information.
Read More06-IB18: Re: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Town of Smyrna
Complainant alleged that the Town of Smyrna violated the open meeting requirements of FOIA by (i) not providing timely notice to the public of a special meeting of the Town; and (ii) not disclosing in the agenda for the meeting that the Council would discuss appointing a Vice Mayor. HELD: (i) the notice of the public meeting violated FOIA by failing to explain why a special meeting was required without providing 7 days notice; and (ii) the agenda violated FOIA b/c it did not indicate that the Town would be discussing the appointment of a Vice Mayor at the special meeting.
Read More
