HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.sag/sagar0117 and id is 1 raw text is:
TIM GRIFFIN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
Opinion No. 2024-097
January 2, 2025
Andrew Thornton
City Attorney
City of Maumelle
550 Edgewood Drive
Maumelle, Arkansas 72113
Via email only: andrew@maumelle.org
Dear Mr. Thornton:
You have requested an opinion from this office regarding the Arkansas Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA). Your request, which is made as the attorney for the custodian of personnel and
evaluation records, is based on A.C.A. § 25-19-105(c)(3)(B)(i).
You indicate that the City of Maumelle received a FOIA request for the personnel file[s] of two
former employees of the Maumelle Police Department. The records custodian has classified most
of the personnel files as personnel records, and the custodian intends to release those records with
redactions of the former employees' phone numbers, addresses, dates of birth, social security
numbers, employee numbers, marital status, and information about dependents. The custodian also
intends to redact references' names and contact information, documents related to time off and
requests for time off, and change-in-benefits records.
The custodian has classified the remaining records as employee evaluations. The custodian intends
to withhold the employee evaluations that did not result in suspension or termination of the former
employees. And the custodian intends to release the employee evaluations that resulted in
suspension or termination.
You have provided me with unredacted copies of the personnel files, along with the custodian's
proposed redactions. The former employees object to the release of the records. You ask if the
custodian's decisions are consistent with the FOIA.
RESPONSE
In my opinion, the custodian has correctly classified the personnel records and has properly
redacted the former employees' phone numbers, addresses, dates of birth, social security numbers,
employee numbers, marital status, and information about dependents. But the custodian's
323 CENTER STREET, SUITE 200
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.sag/sagar0117&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)