The Complainant alleged that New Castle County (“the County”) did not provide access to public records within a reasonable time. Held: the time it took the County to respond was not unreasonable under the circumstances. The request for documents pertaining to a $230,000 transfer from the Executive Contingency Fund to the County Law Department was reasonably specific and those documents are public records under FOIA.
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that the City of Newark (“the City”) violated FOIA by meeting via an exchange of e-mails without notice to the public or an opportunity for the public to participate. Held: the City violated FOIA when, in an exchange of e-mails over the course of March 13-14, 2002, the City’s Nominating Committee discussed public business without notice to the public and without an opportunity for the public to observe.
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that New Castle County (“the County”) violated FOIA by denying you access to documents regarding the Red Lion Village subdivision. The County claims that the documents you requested are not subject to FOIA for two reasons: (1) they pertain to “pending litigation” before the County Planning Board; and (2) they pertain to “potential litigation” because any decision by the Planning Board could be appealed to court. Held: the documents requested from the County are not “public records” for purposes of FOIA because they are within the exemption for pending litigation.
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that the Christina School District (“the School District”) violated FOIA by (1) not providing the public seven days’ notice of a meeting on February 26, 2003; and (2) going into executive session at that meeting for a purpose not authorized by law. Held: the School District did not violate FOIA by posting notice of the February 26, 2003 special meeting less than seven days in advance; and (2) the School District did not violate FOIA by going into executive session because it discussed personnel matters authorized by law.
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that the Town of Fenwick Island (“the Town”) violated FOIA by; (1) failing to prepare timely minutes of the Town Council; (2) meeting without notice to the public sometime in November 2002 to hire Glenn Hudson for six months as officer-in-charge of the Town police department; and (3) meeting on November 22, 2002 in executive session to discuss subjects not authorized by FOIA. Held: the Town did violate FOIA by failing to prepare timely minutes. The Town did not violate FOIA as follows: (1) Town Council did not meet without notice to the public to discuss the term of Glenn Hudson’s contract in November 2002; (2) Town Council provided adequate public notice of a special meeting held on November 22, 2002; and (3) Town Council met in executive session on November 22, 2002 for a purpose authorized by statute.
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that the Town of Fenwick Island (“the Town”) violated the open meeting requirements of FOIA by not allowing him to speak at a meeting of the Town Council on November 15, 2002. Held: the Town violated the open meeting requirements of FOIA at the November 15, 2002 Council meeting by: (1) restricting public comment to Town property owners, and then allowing some non-property owners but not you to comment on the proposal to hire Glenn Hudson as the officer-in-charge of the Town police department; and (2) by failing to prepare minutes of that meeting reflecting the vote, by individual members of the Council, to hire Mr. Hudson.
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that New Castle County (“the County”) violated FOIA by denying access to “subpoenas issued to either New Castle County government or individual county employees by the U. S. Attorney’s Office since September 1, 2002.” Held: Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure is a statute which specifically exempts the disclosure of grand jury subpoenas under FOIA.
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that New Castle County (“the County”) violated FOIA by not providing her with the “names, addresses, or telephone numbers for the President or other contact persons” for maintenance corporations registered with the County on the ground of personal privacy. Held: the names of the presidents and the contact address for each corporation are public information under FOIA. However the County did not violate the open records requirements of FOIA by denying access to the home and work telephone numbers of such presidents.
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that the Town of Camden (“the Town”) violated FOIA by: (1) meeting, without notice to the public, prior to a meeting scheduled for August 5, 2002, to discuss a conditional use application by your client, Barclay Farms; (2) having two members of the Town Council meet without notice to the public to discuss the Barclay Farms application on August 21, 2002; and (3) the Town denying you access to public records regarding the August 21, 2002 meeting. Held: the Town Council violated FOIA: (1) by meeting in executive session on May 9 and September 3, 2002 for a purpose not authorized by law; (2) by not complying with the procedures required by FOIA for going into executive session at those two meetings; (3) by failing to maintain minutes of those two meetings; and (4) by failing to make publicly available records pertaining to those meetings. As a consequence of these serious FOIA violations, any action taken by the Town Council with regard to Barclay Farms at the meeting on September 9, 2002 is invalid because it was tainted by prior violations of the open meeting law.
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that the Town of South Bethany (“the Town”) violated FOIA by failing to provide public record access to your requests for public records. Held: the town’s resolution dated July 27, 2001 is hereby declared unenforceable. The town is directed to adopt a public document access policy consistent with FOIA, this opinion and the various published rulings of this office as reflected in the FOIA Manual published by this office no later than February 28, 2003.
Read More