Can I still file a FOIA complaint about a school board meeting that happened over a year ago?

Official title

00-IB05: FOIA Complaint Against Red Clay Consolidated School District

Plain-English summary

A resident complained to the AG in January 2000 about a Red Clay Consolidated School District open meeting law violation and about being denied access to the minutes of an executive session held on December 16, 1998. The school district responded on two fronts. First, it pointed out that the underlying meeting occurred back in November 1998, well more than six months before the complaint was filed, past FOIA's deadline for challenging a public body's action. Second, the district produced a copy of an August 25, 1999 letter it had already sent the resident, enclosing the executive session minutes she said she'd been denied. Because those minutes had already been provided months before this complaint, the AG found that part of the dispute moot on top of being untimely. FOIA gives citizens a limited window, generally within 60 days of learning of an action but no later than six months after the action itself, to challenge a public body's conduct, and the AG's office has consistently declined to pursue complaints that arrive after that window closes. Since the meeting at issue was well outside that six-month period, the AG took no further action on the complaint.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2000. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: How long do I have to file a FOIA complaint about a public meeting?
A: At the time of this opinion, FOIA generally required a challenge within 60 days of learning of the action, and in no event more than six months after the action itself. The AG's office declined to pursue complaints filed after that window.

Q: If I already received the records I asked for, does my FOIA complaint about being denied them still matter?
A: Not usually. The AG found the complaint here moot once it confirmed the resident had already been sent the executive session minutes months before the complaint was even filed.

Q: Does the Attorney General's office ever investigate complaints filed long after the fact anyway?
A: Not as a matter of practice, according to this opinion. The AG noted it has consistently declined to pursue FOIA complaints about actions that occurred more than six months before the complaint was filed.

Background and statutory framework

The complaint concerned a November 1998 Red Clay Consolidated School District meeting and access to the resulting December 16, 1998 executive session minutes. Applying 29 Del. C. Section 10005(a)'s limitations period, generally 60 days from learning of an action and no more than six months from the action itself, the AG found the January 2000 complaint fell well outside that window. The AG also found the underlying records-access claim moot, since the district had already produced the requested minutes to the resident in August 1999, months before the complaint was filed.

Citations and references

Statutes:

• 29 Del. C. Section 10005(a), limitations period for challenging a public body's action under FOIA

Source

• Landing page: https://attorneygeneral.delaware.gov/2000/02/18/00-ib05-foia-complaint-against-red-clay-consolidated-school-district/

Original opinion text

February 18, 2000

Civil Division-Kent County (739-7641)

Ms. M. Denise Tolliver

109 Gardengate Road

Camden, DE 19934

RE: Freedom of Information Act Complaint Against Red Clay Consolidated School District

Dear Ms. Tolliver:

On January 31, 2000, this Office received your complaint under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) against the Red Clay Consolidated School District. By letter dated February 4, 2000, we asked the School District to respond to your complaint. By letter dated February 15, 2000, the School District responded arguing that your complaint about a violation of the open meeting law was time-barred because the meeting occurred in November 1998, more than six months ago. The School District also provided us with a copy of a letter dated August 25, 1999 to you enclosing a copy of the minutes for the executive session held on December 16, 1998 (copy enclosed). Your claim that the School District denied you access to the “executive session minutes dated December 16, 1998” therefore is moot.

FOIA provides that a citizen complaining of a violation of the open meeting law has a right to challenge the validity “of any action of a public body by filing suit within 60 days of the citizen’s learning of such action but in no event later than 6 months after the date of the action.” 29 Del.C. Section 10005(a). This Office in the past has declined to pursue any FOIA complaint where the act complained of took place more than six months prior to the date of the complaint. Since the meeting that is the subject of your complaint occurred more than six months ago, we will not take any further action with regard to your complaint.

Very truly yours,

W. Michael Tupman

Deputy Attorney General

Enclosure

cc: Michael J. Rich, Esquire

State Solicitor

Philip G. Johnson

Opinion Coordinator

Katherine R. Witherspoon, Esquire