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 MorePetitioner 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 MorePetitioner 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 MorePetitioner alleged that the Personnel Subcommittee violated FOIA by: 1) failing to indicate the potential for any vote other than a vote to approve meeting minutes on its August 14, 2017 meeting agenda, and 2) voting affirmatively on “the recommendations and discussions that Council collectively had during the executive session.” DECIDED: Based on a review of documents submitted in camera, this Office determined the vote held was only to direct counsel to conduct legal research on a personnel matter discussed in executive session. Under the circumstances, this was not “major issue to be discussed” and therefore was not required to be included on the an agenda. Although the agenda would have been more accurate if it had listed the multiple bases for executive session, because those discussions were inextricably intertwined with a properly-noticed basis for executive session, it did not amount to a FOIA violation.
Read MorePetitioner alleged that DelDOT improperly denied his request for the name, address, and “relevant information” about the individual who filed a complaint about Petitioner’s mailbox. DelDOT cited the exemption for investigatory documents in denying the request. HELD: There was no FOIA violation. Complaints are part of investigatory files, which remain confidential even after an investigation has concluded.
Read MorePetitioner alleged that the Sussex County Planning & Zoning Commission failed to share documents he submitted to that Commission with the Sussex County Council. HELD: Such conduct, if the facts are as alleged, would not violate FOIA.
Read MorePetitioner alleged that Department of Health and Social Services (“DHSS”) violated FOIA, specifically, by denying his July 26, 2017 request in its entirety rather than provide redacted versions of records responsive to his request. HELD: As we are satisfied that DHSS did not violate FOIA by denying your request in its entirety pursuant to 29 Del. C. Section 10002(1)(6).
Read MorePetitioner alleged Office of the Governor improperly redacted information from the Governor’s calendar. HELD: As we are satisfied that OGov’s counsel applied well-recognized FOIA exemptions to its supplemental production, it is our determination that OGov did not violate FOIA as alleged.
Read MorePetitioner alleged that the City of Seaford failed to present important public business, AG Opinion 17-IB17 and AG Opinion 17-IB27 to the public during the regular meetings of the City Council. HELD: It is the determination that the City did not violate FOIA as alleged. Please note that both opinions are publicly available at http://opinions.attorneygeneral.delaware.gov/.
Read MorePetitioner alleged violations of the open meetings provisions of FOIA with regard to meetings held in 2002 and 2016. HELD: As a matter of practice and in keeping with time limitations followed by the courts, this office does not consider petitions regarding actions more than six months in the past and does not believe the circumstances of this petition warrant a departure from this practice. This petition was thus considered untimely.
Read MoreDelaware's Governor
State Directory
Elected Officials
General Assembly
Delaware Courts
State Employees
Cities & Towns
Delaware State Code
State Regulations
Business First Steps
Phone Directory
Locations Directory
Delaware Public Meetings
Voting & Elections
Transparency
Choose Health DE
Tax Center
Personal Income Tax
Privacy Policy
Weather & Travel
Contact State Agencies
Corporations
Franchise Tax
Gross Receipts Tax
Withholding Tax
Guides to Services
Help Center
Mobile Apps
E-mail / Text Alerts
Social Media
Built by the Government Information Center
©MMXXVI Delaware.gov
