The Town Council Town Manager Search Citizen Panel violated the OMA during its January 20, 2016 meeting when the discussions were not appropriate for executive session. Our review found no discussion concerning the job performance, character, or physical/mental health of any applicants. See R.I....

There was no evidence that the Complainant sought access to minutes that allegedly were not available or not posted in accordance with R.I. Gen. Laws 42-46-7(b)(2) and (d), and based upon this evidence, this Department determined the Complainant was not aggrieved. We found no violation.

The Town of Coventry did not violate the APRA when the evidence revealed that although the Complainant did not comply with the Town's APRA procedures, the Town responded in a timely manner. The Complainant's rebuttal did not challenge that her APRA request was not made consistent with the Town's...

The Complainant made an APRA request seeking copies of expenses/costs for medical and dental insurance for all personnel for the months of June, July and August 2016. Based upon the evidence presented, the Fire District responded with records, but for the months of May, June and July, instead of...

The Complainant alleged the City violated the APRA when it improperly withheld records responsive to her APRA request. The Complainant's APRA request sought administrative and court pleadings and all settlement agreements from January 1, 2010 in which a particular person was the attorney of record.

The Complainant alleged that the DOC violated the APRA when it did not provide him access to documents responsive to his request for records on the escape of John Gary Robichaud from the ACI. This escape occurred in the early 1970s. Based on our review of the produced documents and the evidence...

The denial of internal affairs reports relating to a particular incident did not violate the APRA. The Complainant provided no public interest and the privacy interests of the affected individuals outweighed this non-asserted interest.

The City of Providence violated the APRA when its extension provided nearly verbatim the language set forth in R.I. Gen. Laws 38-2-3(e) and was not "particularized to the specific request made." The Complainant took no issue with the fact that the City had "good cause" to assert an extension. ...

The Complainant alleged a violation based on the failure to timely respond within ten (10) business days, however, after review, this allegation was determined to be unfounded and a timely response was provided. Moreover, the Complainant alleged that other aspects of the public body's response...

The Rhode Island Department of Education ("RIDE") did not violate the APRA since the evidence established that RIDE did not receive the Complainant's APRA request. While it was unclear why RIDE did not receive the Complainant's APRA request, the Complainant did not provide any rebuttal to...