Opinions released in December, 2009
Showing records 1 - 10 of 19 results
| Opinion number: 2009-210 | |
| Requestor: Ginocchio, Janie Editor, Paragould Daily Press | Release date: 12/28/2009 |
| Full Opinion: HTML or PDF | |
| Is the decision of the custodian of records to deny a Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") request for copies of the evaluation/job performance records used to form the basis for the decision to suspend several Greene County Tech School District employees, citing unwarranted invasion of privacy and no compelling public interest, consistent with provisions of the FOIA? RESPONSE: The opinion sets forth the standards the custodian should apply in determining which records are subject to disclosure. | |
| Opinion number: 2009-186 | |
| Requestor: Threet, John Pros Att'y, 4th Judicial District | Release date: 12/18/2009 |
| Full Opinion: HTML or PDF | |
| Under A.C.A. 25-19-109, may a public water-entity charge for personnel/contractor time spent responding to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to transfer paper records into an electronic medium? RESPONSE: Section 25-19-109 does not apply to the scenario you describe in your background facts. Thus, that statute is not authority for the contemplated charges. It is possible that another section of the FOIA--A.C.A. 25-19-105(d)(3)(A)(i)--applies in this scenario, in which case the custodian might be authorized to charge for outside personnel time spent making the documents available as electronic data. But, as explained in the opinion, whether subsection 25-19-105(d)(3)(A)(i) applies depends on the threshold finding that the custodian is required to comply with this particular FOIA request. I cannot make this finding because it requires a factual determination. If a fact finder determines that the custodian is not obliged to comply with the request, but the custodian nevertheless decides to accommodate the requester, then, in my opinion, no provision of the FOIA enables the custodian to charge for either copying fees or personnel/contractor time. | |
| Opinion number: 2009-178 | |
| Requestor: Broadway, Shane State Senator | Release date: 12/18/2009 |
| Full Opinion: HTML or PDF | |
| If a corporation is not owned by an alderman or council member, may services be provided by the corporation to the city pursuant to A.C.A. 14-42-107(b)(2) which provides that the prohibition in A.C.A. 14-42-107(b)(1) does not apply to corporations in which a controlling interest is held by stockholders who are not aldermen or council members? RESPONSE: For the reasons explained below, it is my opinion that the answer to your question is "no." | |
| Opinion number: 2009-155 | |
| Requestor: English, Jane State Representative | Release date: 12/18/2009 |
| Full Opinion: HTML or PDF | |
| Can a nurse who has had her licenses revoked under A.C.A. 17-87-309(a)(6) for a one-time incident, re-apply for licensure under A.C.A. 17-87-301 and be granted a license if she demonstrates rehabilitation and meets the qualification for it? RESPONSE: No, under the applicable statutes as interpreted by the Nursing Board. The Board has determined that once the review process has concluded without a successful appeal, a revocation by the Board is a permanent loss of licensure. I cannot state that this determination is clearly wrong. I believe it will be necessary to amend the applicable laws and regulations to provide for an application by one whose nursing license has been finally revoked by the Board. | |
| Opinion number: 2009-187 | |
| Requestor: Williams, Bill Chair, Benton County Election Comm'n | Release date: 12/17/2009 |
| Full Opinion: HTML or PDF | |
| What is the meaning of the term "domicile" as it is used in A.C.A. 7-5-201, particularly in the instance when part of a homeowner's property lies in an area to be annexed but the property owner's home lies outside the area to be annexed? Q2) Is a voter eligible to vote as a resident of a city if the city's boundary line passes through the voter's residence? RESPONSE: Q1) If a voter's home lies in one district and the curtilage lies partly in another, regardless of whether an annexation is planned or has occurred, I believe the property owner is obliged to vote in the district in which his residence is located. Q2) I have found no authority addressing this question. Although it would seem logical that an individual whose home structure straddles two districts might choose the district in which he will vote, no provision of law declares as much. Legislative clarification is warranted. | |
| Opinion number: 2009-182 | |
| Requestor: Ragland, Roy State Representative | Release date: 12/17/2009 |
| Full Opinion: HTML or PDF | |
| Does Act 701 of 2009, an act to clarify the use of all-terrain vehicles by a person with a serious walking handicap, violate provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act? RESPONSE: No. The adequacy of a modification of rules to accommodate a disabled person is determined on a case-by-case basis. The change in the law made by Act 701 (moving ATV traffic from the highway right of way to the highway shoulder) might, however, be an inadequate modification in a particular case. | |
| Opinion number: 2009-197 | |
| Requestor: McCrary, Walls State Representative | Release date: 12/16/2009 |
| Full Opinion: HTML or PDF | |
| Does a contract with a personal injury attorney that an Arkansas resident never spoke to and who rubber-stamped the contract, legally bind the Arkansas resident to the contract where the attorney can take a 25% lien against any future settlement without the Arkansas resident notifying the attorney in writing that he is firing the attorney? RESPONSE: Declined to answer. The Attorney General is prohibited from engaging in the private practice of law. A.C.A. 25-16-701. Additionally, the question requires factual determinations that are outside the scope of an Attorney General opinion. See A.C.A. 16-22-302 (the attorney's lien statutes). The attorney's lien is subject to judicial determination and enforcement. A.C.A. 16-22-304. | |
| Opinion number: 2009-177 | |
| Requestor: Green, Rick State Representative | Release date: 12/16/2009 |
| Full Opinion: HTML or PDF | |
| In light of the provisions of Act 181 of 2009, prohibiting drivers of motor vehicles from using handheld wireless telephones to engage in text messaging, could a driver sitting in a parked car be cited as violating that Act? RESPONSE: Reading your question in full, it appears you are asking whether a person violates Act 181 of 2009 if the person is engaged in text messaging or accessing the Internet while sitting in a parked car with the engine turned off. In my opinion, Act 181 of 2009 probably does not prohibit such conduct. | |
| Opinion number: 2009-175 | |
| Requestor: Smith, Lindsley State Representative | Release date: 12/16/2009 |
| Full Opinion: HTML or PDF | |
| Can the City of Fayetteville legally adopt a policy similar to A.C.A. 11-19-259, or local purchasing preferences adopted in Madison, Wisconsin, such that: "If a local vendor submits a bid within 1% of the lowest non-local vendor, the purchase is awarded to that local vendor?" Q2) Can local vendors be "provided with a bonus equal to 5% of total available points" when a Request for Proposals is being considered? RESPONSE: Q1) Section 19-11-259 of the Code authorizes a political subdivision to allow preferences in bidding only to the advantage of in-state bidders as opposed to out-of-state bidders, and only then when the proposed purchase is for commodities related to a public works project. Neither this statute nor any other statute authorizes a political subdivision to allow preferences in bidding to an in-state "local" bidder as opposed to an in-state "non-local" bidder. Accordingly, I believe the answer to this question is "no." Q2) To the extent that this question likewise deals with intrastate preferences in bidding, I believe the answer is likewise "no." | |
| Opinion number: 2009-201 | |
| Requestor: Belew, Teresa Sponsor | Release date: 12/15/2009 |
| Full Opinion: HTML or PDF | |
| Request for certification of the popular name and ballot title of an act to levy a wholesale excise tax on all alcoholic beverages, establish the "Arkansas Substance Abuse Programs Fund," and other purposes. RESPONSE: Rejected due to ambiguities in the text of the proposed act. | |
Prev Next
New Search
Connect With Dustin
