To better communicate with the public, press, and interested parties, Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin publishes a monthly digest of recently issued opinions.
At the Reckoning we believe these opinions are important to readers.
This month’s digest includes all opinions issued during April 2025.
Clicking on the opinion numbers in this digest will take you to the full opinion. To find other opinions, please visit our opinions search page here.
OPINION 2025-005
Requested by State Representative Les A. Warren
Question: May funds received from the Property Tax Relief Fund be pledged to bond debt for capital improvements or other lawful purposes?
Brief Response: The answer to your question depends on the limitations already in place for the county’s millage. Counties levy ad valorem taxes on their citizens’ real property. Some of those taxes are reduced due to the homestead tax credit in our state constitution. So the General Assembly created the Property Tax Relief Trust Fund to replace money the county would have received but for the homestead tax credit. Money a county receives from the trust fund can only be used for the same purposes and in the same proportions as the property-tax revenue the county would have received but for the homestead property tax credit. Thus, if the millage property taxes that are used to fund a county library are restricted to library operations and maintenance, the replacement money from the trust fund will be similarly restricted.
OPINION 2025-009
Requested by State Senator Clint Penzo
Question 1: If no emergency has been declared by the Governor, are council members allowed to attend city council meetings electronically and vote on matters?
Brief Response: Possibly. The canons of construction point different ways, so I cannot definitively opine on how a court may rule.
Question 2: Can a city pass an ordinance to allow a council member to attend meetings [electronically]?
Brief Response: Yes. Cities have the authority to enact ordinances that authorize their public bodies to hold public meetings electronically and that dictate how often a council member can utilize remote attendance.
Question 3: If the answer to question 2 is yes, is there a limit to how many times yearly the council member can utilize remote attendance?
Brief Response: No. Cities have the authority to enact ordinances that dictate how often a council member can utilize remote attendance.
OPINION 2025-014
Requested by State Representative Carlton Wing
Question 1: Under A.C.A. § 23-79-1501, is Medicaid considered a “health benefit plan”?
Brief Response: Sometimes. Medicaid comprises multiple programs, each of which operates differently. Whether any specific Medicaid program in Arkansas fits the definition of “health benefit plan” in A.C.A. § 23-79-1501 will depend on how that program operates.
Question 2: Under A.C.A. § 23-79-1501, does “dental care” mean comprehensive dental care for the patient’s entire oral cavity or just the part of the mouth affected by the cleft palate or craniofacial problem?
Brief Response: The latter. The law requires coverage for dental care only if an approved cleft-craniofacial team determines it is “medically necessary to improve a functional impairment that results from the craniofacial anomaly.” Thus, a health benefit plan must cover comprehensive dental care only if the cleft-craniofacial team makes that determination.
OPINION 2025-020
Requested by Chief Tischa Beaty-Johnson
Question: Is the custodian’s decision to release the requested records consistent with the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)?
Brief Response: In my opinion, the custodian has correctly classified the personnel records and has properly redacted Officer Wilson’s phone number, address, date of birth, social security number, and beneficiary name and relationship from LOPFI and COBRA forms. But the custodian’s redactions of the ACF application number, salary information, co-borrower’s name and signature from employment verification, and witness signature from a LOPFI form are inconsistent with the FOIA. Additionally, the custodian needs to redact information related to Officer Wilson’s marital status.
OPINION 2025-021
Requested by Mr. David Couch
Question: Request for review and certification of the popular name and ballot title of a proposed constitutional amendment with the popular name, “An Amendment to Amend the Initiative and Referendum Process.”
Brief Response: Because the text of your proposed amendment is misleading, I am prevented from substituting and certifying a more suitable ballot title that is not misleading. Consequently, my statutory duty under A.C.A. § 7-9-107(e) is to reject your proposed popular name and ballot title, stating my “reasons therefor,” and to “instruct … [you] to redesign your proposed measure and the ballot title … in a manner that would not be misleading.”
OPINION 2025-023
Requested by Ms. Lela Chism
Question: Is the custodian’s decision to release the requested records consistent with the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)?
Brief Response: It is the statutory duty of this Office under A.C.A. § 25-19-105(c)(3)(B) to state whether a custodian’s decision to release “personnel or evaluation records” is consistent with the FOIA. The City of Little Rock’s custodian of records has determined that the records should be released with certain redactions. For reasons discussed in this opinion, the custodian’s decision to release these documents is partially consistent with the FOIA. Some additional information from personnel records is exempt from disclosure, and the employee performance review records should be withheld. I also note that I cannot determine whether the custodian’s decision to redact certain information is consistent with the FOIA because I was not provided with unredacted copies of the documents. As to your specific objections, references’ contact information should be disclosed under the FOIA and the requester’s intent and motives are generally irrelevant when determining whether public records must be disclosed.
OPINION 2025-025
Requested by Mr. Dustin Chapman, Guy City Attorney
Question: Is the custodian’s decision to release the requested records consistent with the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)?
Brief Response: In my opinion, the custodian’s decision to release the records as redacted is partially consistent with the FOIA. The responsive records are properly classified as personnel records, and the custodian has correctly determined that they are “generally subject to disclosure with some portions redacted.” However, some information that is subject to disclosure has been improperly redacted, and several additional pieces of information must be redacted from the records before they may be released.
OPINION 2025-029
Requested by Officer Chad Fowler
Question: Is the custodian’s decision to release the requested records consistent with the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)?
Brief Response: In my opinion, the custodian’s decision to release the four documents provided is consistent with the FOIA. But I cannot determine whether the custodian’s decision to redact certain information within the documents is consistent with the FOIA because I was not provided with unredacted copies of the documents.
