If a Delaware town is considering banning chickens, can a resident FOIA the underlying chicken complaints, or are they exempt code-enforcement records?

Plain-English summary

Millsboro is considering amending its Town Charter to address keeping domestic fowl. Elise Altergott filed a sweeping FOIA request asking for all chicken-related complaints, court cases, paperwork, meeting minutes, and links to public notices for the Charter and Code Committee.

The Town responded item by item:
- Complaints about chickens were withheld under the investigatory files exemption.
- Court cases mentioned at the January 25, 2025 Charter and Code Committee meeting: a responsive document plus a link to minutes on the Town website.
- Meeting agendas and minutes for the chicken discussions: a link to the Town website.
- A September 2, 2025 meeting: did not occur.
- Public notices for the Charter and Code Committee: links to the Town hall door notice posting and the Town's event calendar webpage.

Altergott petitioned, arguing the chicken complaints were withheld improperly, the link-only responses were inadequate, the minutes were not specific enough to identify discussions about her, and the agendas should be posted online.

The AG sided with the Town on every point.

1. Chicken complaints: investigatory files exemption applies. The complaints went to the Town Police Department and the Building and Code Official. Both are agencies that investigate civil code violations or criminal matters. Per News-Journal Co. v. Billingsley (Del. Ch. 1980) and a long line of AG opinions, the investigatory files exemption attaches as soon as the agency is aware of a potential issue and survives investigation closure. Code enforcement complaints fit squarely within the exemption. Section 10002(o)(3) blocks disclosure.

2. Link-only responses: compliant. Some of Altergott's requests literally asked for the website links. The Town providing those links was responsive on its face. For requests that asked for substantive records, the Town's link to the Town website where minutes were available was an appropriate response, given no indication that Altergott lacked internet access. AG opinion 16-IB22 (2016) supports this practice.

3. Meeting minutes: sufficiently general. Section 10004(f) requires only "a record of those members present and a record, by individual members ... of each vote taken and action agreed upon." There is no requirement that minutes summarize discussion topics in detail. The Town's general minutes complied.

4. Agenda posting: no online requirement for municipalities. Section 10004(e)(5) requires posting "at the principal office of the public body holding the meeting." For municipalities, there is no online posting requirement under FOIA. The Town's bulletin-board posting at Town hall was sufficient.

So the Town won on all four FOIA claims.

What this means for you

If you are a Delaware resident dealing with code enforcement

Code enforcement complaints filed with the police or the building/code official are not reachable through FOIA. The investigatory files exemption covers them. If you want to know who complained about you (or about a property you are concerned with), FOIA will not get you that.

Alternatives:
- If a citation or notice of violation has been issued, that may be public.
- Court records of any proceeding are public.
- Talk to the code official directly; some are willing to share information without a formal FOIA request.

If you are a chicken keeper or considering one

The Charter or local ordinance is the substantive law. Find out what is currently allowed in your town and what is being proposed. Public hearings and council meetings are the path to influence the policy. The complaints driving the proposed change are exempt, but the public discussion of the policy is open and you can comment.

If you are a Delaware municipal clerk

The opinion confirms several practical points:
1. Code enforcement complaints can be denied as investigatory files. Cite § 10002(o)(3) and the standard line of cases.
2. Responding with a website link is acceptable when the records are genuinely available there and the requester has not indicated a lack of internet access.
3. Minutes do not need to summarize discussion content. The statute requires only members present, votes, and actions.
4. You do not have to post agendas online if your municipality does not maintain a website. Posting at the principal office (e.g., Town hall door) satisfies § 10004(e)(5).

If you are a code enforcement officer

Your complaints, investigation files, and notices are protected by the FOIA investigatory exemption. The privacy of complainants is part of the policy rationale: people who report violations need to know their identities will not be disclosed through FOIA. Continue to handle complaints with that confidentiality expectation.

If you are filing a FOIA request and want substantive records

Frame your request to maximize what is actually reachable. Avoid asking only for "complaints" if you really want the substantive code-enforcement actions. Instead, ask for:
- Notices of violation issued (public-facing enforcement actions).
- Court filings.
- Meeting minutes and agendas where the matter was discussed.
- The text of proposed and enacted ordinances.

These are typically reachable under FOIA. The complaint paperwork itself is not.

If you want online agenda posting

That is a policy ask, not a FOIA enforcement question. FOIA does not require online posting for municipal bodies. If you want online posting in your town, the path is local advocacy: ask the council to adopt the practice, or work for a charter amendment.

Background and statutory framework

29 Del. C. § 10002(o)(3) exempts investigatory files compiled for civil or criminal law-enforcement purposes. Code enforcement falls within "civil law-enforcement purposes" because civil code violations are enforced by Town officials.

News-Journal Co. v. Billingsley, 1980 WL 3043 (Del. Ch. Nov. 20, 1980), holds the exemption attaches at first awareness of a potential issue and survives investigation closure. AG opinion 09-IB06 (2009) addressed code-enforcement complaints specifically: "A public body that enforces the law has the right ... to withhold from the public letters of complaint about violations of the law. This protection is necessary to avoid 'a chilling effect on those who might bring pertinent information to the attention of [law enforcement].'"

29 Del. C. § 10003(h) sets the response deadline. Responses can include providing the records or denying with a reason. Providing a link to records on the Town website has been recognized in 16-IB22 (Oct. 24, 2016) as a sufficient response when there is no indication the requester lacks internet access.

29 Del. C. § 10004(f) sets the minimum content for meeting minutes. The minimum is members present and votes taken; substantive summaries are not required.

29 Del. C. § 10004(e)(5) requires posting notice at the principal office of the public body. Online posting is not required for municipalities (the rule for state agencies is different).

Common questions

Why are code complaints private when so much else about code enforcement is public?

The investigatory files exemption protects the front-end complaint process to encourage reporting. If complaints could be released, code enforcement would lose a major source of information. Once code action is taken (notice of violation issued, citation written, court case filed), the back-end public-facing actions become accessible through other rules. So enforcement is transparent, but the complaint that triggered it is not.

Are court records of code-violation cases public?

Yes. Once a code enforcement matter is litigated (Justice of the Peace Court for ordinance violations, for example), the case file becomes public under court records access rules. Court records are not within FOIA; they are governed by court rules.

Can I find out who is complaining about my chickens?

Probably not through FOIA. The complaints are exempt. If a code-enforcement action is filed against you, you would learn the identity of the complainant through the discovery or investigative materials in that action. Until then, the identity is protected.

Can the Town just give me a link instead of producing records?

If the records are actually available at the link, and the link is to a valid Town webpage where you can find them, yes. The AG has accepted this practice as a reasonable response under FOIA. The exception is if the requester lacks internet access (FOIA still requires reasonable access regardless), in which case the Town must provide the records in another form.

Do meeting minutes have to mention every topic discussed?

No. Section 10004(f) sets the minimum content: members present and votes/actions. Some municipalities go beyond and produce detailed narrative minutes, but FOIA does not require it. If you want detail about what was discussed at a meeting, your options include: attending the meeting, requesting the audio or video recording (if any), or asking for a more detailed report (which the Town can decline).

Why don't agendas have to be posted online?

The General Assembly chose to require online posting only for state-level public bodies, not for municipalities. The reasoning: many small Delaware municipalities did not maintain websites when the law was written, and requiring online posting would have imposed a cost burden. Larger municipalities often post online voluntarily, but FOIA does not require it.

Where do I find Millsboro's chicken proposal?

The opinion notes that the Town is considering amending the Charter on this. Look at:
- The Town of Millsboro website (www.millsboro.org).
- The Charter and Code Committee meeting minutes.
- The Delaware General Assembly's Charter amendment process (Charter changes require legislative approval).
- Public hearings before any final adoption.

What is the path to influence the chicken policy?

Attend the public meetings of the Charter and Code Committee. Comment during public comment periods. Talk to your council representatives. If you support keeping chickens or oppose a ban, mobilize neighbors to speak at meetings. The substantive policy decision is political, not FOIA-driven.

Citations

• Statutes: 29 Del. C. §§ 10001-10008 (FOIA); § 10002(o)(3) (investigatory files); § 10003(a) (right of access); § 10004(e)(5) (notice posting); § 10004(f) (minutes content); § 10005(c) (burden of proof).
• Cases: Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Univ. of Del., 267 A.3d 996 (Del. 2021); News-Journal Co. v. Billingsley, 1980 WL 3043 (Del. Ch. Nov. 20, 1980).
• Prior AG opinions: 17-IB05 (Mar. 10, 2017); 16-IB22 (Oct. 24, 2016); 09-IB06 (June 9, 2009); 98-IB13 (Dec. 8, 1998).

Source

• Landing page: https://attorneygeneral.delaware.gov/2025/10/16/25-ib51-10-16-25-foia-opinion-letter-to-elise-altergott-re-town-of-millsboro/
• Original PDF: https://attorneygeneral.delaware.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2025/10/Attorney-General-Opinion-No.-25-IB51.pdf

Original opinion text

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
Attorney General Opinion No. 25-IB51
October 16, 2025

VIA EMAIL
Elise Altergott
[email protected]

RE: FOIA Petition Regarding the Town of Millsboro

Dear Ms. Altergott:

We write in response to your correspondence alleging that the Town of Millsboro violated Delaware's Freedom of Information Act, 29 Del. C. §§ 10001-10008 ("FOIA"). We treat this correspondence as a Petition for a determination pursuant to 29 Del. C. § 10005 of whether a violation of FOIA has occurred or is about to occur. As discussed more fully herein, we determine that the Town did not violate FOIA as alleged in responding to this request and did not commit the asserted meeting-related violations.

BACKGROUND

The Town of Millsboro is considering a proposal to amend a Town Charter provision related to the keeping of domestic fowl. On September 5, 2025, you submitted a FOIA request to the Town seeking eight items: (1) all documents relating to every complaint regarding chickens within Town limits; (2) all paperwork regarding court cases the Town has filed related to chickens; (3) all court cases filed, won, and lost regarding chickens in Town; (4) all paperwork and minutes regarding the court cases mentioned at the January 25, 2025 Charter and Code Committee meeting (5) the meeting agenda, minutes, and ratified minutes of the Charter and Code Committee meeting where they discussed "outlawing" chickens; (6) the website link to all the postings regarding Charter and Code Committee's September 2, 2025 meeting including the agenda, minutes, and ratified minutes; (7) the website link for all past and future public notices of the Charter and Code Committee's "September 2, 2025" meetings; and (8) the website link for all past and future public notices regarding all committees. For the first three items, the Town replied that investigatory files are not public records under Section 10002(o)(3) of FOIA. For the fourth item requesting "paperwork" regarding the minutes that discussed court cases, the Town provided a responsive document and provided a link to the Town website where the minutes can be found. For the fifth item seeking agendas and minutes for Committee meetings discussing outlawing chickens, the Town gave a website link. For the sixth item regarding a September 2, 2025 meeting, the Town replied that a meeting was not held on that date. For the seventh and eighth items, the Town stated that all public meetings are posted on the Town hall door and the Town's event calendar, giving a link to this webpage. This Petition followed.

In the Petition, you assert that you would like to know the details of the complaints regarding your or others' keeping of chickens, but the Town denied the request under the investigatory files exemption. You argue that the FOIA request was not properly answered, as the Town merely advised you where to search for answers. You further allege that the meeting minutes are not clear because no or minimal information is provided; only after research were you able to discern that you were referenced in the meeting discussions. You do not consider the agendas to be public as you must go to the Town hall to view them and object to the fact that the agendas have not been published on the Town's website.

The Town, through its legal counsel, replied to this Petition and enclosed the affidavits of the FOIA coordinator and Town Manager ("Response"). The Town asserts it properly withheld the complaints pursuant to the investigatory files exemption in 29 Del. C. § 10002(o)(3). The Town contends that the code enforcement office is the type of investigative agency covered by the exemption, and whether a chicken complaint was filed with the police department or the building and code official, the Town appropriately denied access under this exemption. The Town also argues that the reference to the links where the records could be found was appropriate, because some of your requests specifically asked for a link, and providing website links has been previously found to be a sufficient response under FOIA. The Town also notes, upon receiving this Petition, the Town Manager did an additional search for court records out of an abundance of caution and found one more responsive document believed to be inadvertently misfiled, which was enclosed with the Town Manager's affidavit. The Town further alleges that its minutes complied with FOIA, as the topics of the meeting are not required to be summarized, nor does FOIA define how specific any summaries must be. The Town states that the agendas are posted on the door of Town hall but not online; FOIA does not require the online posting of agendas for municipal bodies.

DISCUSSION

Delaware's FOIA law "was enacted to ensure governmental accountability by providing Delaware's citizens access to open meetings and meeting records of governmental or public bodies, as well as access to the public records of those entities." The public body has the burden of proof to justify its denial of access to records and to demonstrate compliance with the FOIA statute. In certain circumstances, a sworn affidavit may be required to meet that burden. This Petition presents both issues related to public records and open meetings for review.

Claims Related to Public Records

The Petition alleges that the chicken complaints were improperly withheld. FOIA requires that citizens be provided reasonable access to and reasonable facilities for the copying of public records. However, "[i]nvestigatory files compiled for civil or criminal law-enforcement purposes" are excluded from the definition of "public record." In this case, the affidavit of the FOIA coordinator attached to the Response states that complaints about chickens were received by the Town Police Department and the Building and Code Official. As these complaints pertain to investigations for civil code enforcement and criminal law enforcement purposes, the complaints themselves are considered part of the investigatory file and are exempt under 29 Del. C. § 10002(o)(3).

The Petition also alleges that the Town merely provided website links in its response to some items, which required you to locate the records. Several requests expressly sought website links, so the Town did not violate FOIA in providing a requested link. For the fourth and fifth items in the request, the Town provided a link where the meeting records were kept. You have not indicated that you lack access to the internet to view these records, nor that the records were not present on the website. Thus, the responses directing you to the Town's website for access to public records is compliant with FOIA's mandate that public records be made available to citizens.

Claims Related to Open Meetings

The Petition argues that the meeting minutes were unclear, as you could not discern that you were the subject of some discussions without additional research. Public bodies are not required to create specific summaries for every discussion that occurs in their minutes. FOIA merely requires "a record of those members present and a record, by individual members (except where the public body is a town assembly where all citizens are entitled to vote), of each vote taken and action agreed upon." Accordingly, as such level of specificity is not required, we find no violation occurred with respect to your claim that the minutes on their face do not allow you to identify the meeting discussions pertaining to you.

You also contend that the posting of the meeting agendas at the Town hall, and not online, does not constitute "public" notice. FOIA does not require municipal public bodies to post their agendas online. Rather, municipal public bodies must post "said notice at the principal office of the public body holding the meeting." Thus, we do not find a violation for the Town's failure to post its agendas online.

CONCLUSION

For the reasons set forth above, we conclude that the Town did not violate FOIA as alleged in responding to this request and did not commit the asserted meeting-related violations.

Very truly yours,
/s/ Dorey L. Cole
Dorey L. Cole
Deputy Attorney General

Approved:
/s/ Patricia A. Davis
Patricia A. Davis
State Solicitor

cc: Mary R. Schrider-Fox, Town Solicitor