Complainant alleged that the Town of Fenwick Island (“the Town”) violated FOIA by: (1) failing to give the public notice of its intent to go into executive session at a meeting on February 8, 2002; (2) improperly entering into executive session at that meeting to discuss pay raises for police officers; (3) failing to give adequate notice to the public that it would go into executive session at a meeting on February 22, 2002; (4) improperly entering into executive session at that meeting to discuss police department problems; (5) failing to give adequate notice to the public of its intent to go into executive session at a meeting on March 16, 2002; (6) impermissibly entering into executive session at that meeting to discuss personnel and legal problems involving the police department; and (7) not providing you with copies of the minutes of executive sessions. Held: the Council violated the open meeting requirements of FOIA when it went into executive session to discuss matters of public business at its meetings on February 8, February 22, and March 16, 2002. The Council violated the agenda requirements of FOIA by amending the agenda just prior to the meeting on March 16, 2002, and without stating the reason for the delay. Finally, the Council violated the public records requirements of FOIA by denying access to the minutes of executive sessions which were not authorized by law.
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that the Christina School District (“the District”) violated FOIA by not providing reasonable access to public records. Specifically, the School District did not provide accounting and other information requested, and the School District’s procedures for processing FOIA requests are “designed to impede the public’s access to documents.” Held: the School District must make available for inspection and copying any rulings or decisions or orders by an administrative body issued during the years 1999, 2000, and 2001 which require the School District to expend monies. Also, in order to charge for the costs of retrieving computerized data, the School District must amend its written rules and regulations to provide for a reasonable schedule of costs. In all other respects, we determine that the School District did not violate the public records requirements of FOIA.
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that Sussex County (“the County”) violated FOIA by discussing and developing a redistricting ordinance in meetings that were not open to the public. Held: the meetings between the County Attorney and others to discuss re-districting were not subject to FOIA because they were part of “an unstructured arrangement” in which the County Attorney sought “advice from what is only a collection of individuals who [did] not significantly interact with each other.” Association of American Physicians, 997 F.2d at 914
Read MoreComplainant alleged that the Town of Middletown (“the Town”) violated FOIA by denying citizens reasonable access to meetings to discuss a proposed Wal-Mart site plan. Held: if a public body has reason to know that a large number of citizens is likely to attend a meeting, then FOIA requires the public body to find another, larger place for the meeting. Alternatively, in the event of an overflow, a public body should consider adjourning the meeting to another time at a facility that can accommodate all of the interested citizens.
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that Sussex County (“the County”) violated FOIA by failing to prepare minutes of a meeting on December 11, 2001. Held: the Council violated the open meeting requirements of FOIA by not preparing minutes of the luncheon between the Council and representatives of the Land Trust on December 11, 2001.
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that the Cape Henlopen School District (“the District”) violated FOIA by not providing you with information you requested. Specifically, you asked for: (1) a schedule of all school bus pickups and drop offs in your neighborhood (145 Beachfield Drive); (2) forms to present a claim for damage to your property allegedly caused by a school bus; and (3) documents relating to inquiries the School District made in the neighborhood and to local zoning boards. Held: FOIA cannot be used to compel production of documents in the possession of a private contractor. See Harold v. Orange County, Fla. App., 668 So.2d 1010, 1011 (1996).
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that Sussex County (“the County”) violated FOIA by failing to provide you with minutes of an executive session held on July 17, 2001. Held: the Council violated the open meeting requirements of FOIA by failing to maintain minutes of an executive session held on July 17, 2001.
Read MoreComplainant alleged that the City of Dover violated the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) because it failed to provide him with the names and addresses of retired city employees. Held: FOIA does not require the disclosure of personnel file information if that disclosure would constitute an invasion of personal privacy. Relying on both Supreme Court and Third Circuit case law, and distinguishing prior attorney general opinions related to the names and salaries of current public employees, the opinion holds that Delaware’s FOIA protects the “names and addresses of retired public employees because disclosure of that information would invade their privacy.” There was no FOIA violation.
Read MoreComplainant alleged that Sussex County violated the Freedom of Information Act because meetings between the County Administrator and his department heads and staff held for the purpose of developing an operating budget for the county were not noticed and open to the public. Held: FOIA does not apply to discussions between the County Administrator (a “body of one” under the statute) and his department heads and staff. “It would be unrealistic, indeed intolerable, to require of such professionals that every meeting, every contact, and every discussion with anyone from whom they would seek counsel or consultation to assist in acquiring the necessary information, data or intelligence needed to advise or guide the authority by whom they are employed, be a public meeting.” Nor did holding such meetings constitute a delegation of authority to a committee such that the committee meetings were required to be open. That is especially so considering the fact that the public has a meaningful opportunity to review and comment on the proposed budget when it is being considered by the full council.
Read MoreThe Complainant alleged that the Dover Safety Advisory Committee violated the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) by failing to notice in the agenda for a meeting that it would discuss the location of a proposed municipal waste transfer facility and the objections of the Dover Air Force Base to that location. Held: The issue arose sufficiently in advance of the meeting to be included in the notice and initial agenda, and the failure to do so deprived concerned citizens of the opportunity to appear and participate in the decision-making process. Because the committee did not have final authority over the location of the facility – it had merely issued a non-binding recommendation to the Kent County Levy Court that the location be rejected – no remedial measures were required.
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
