Formal Opinions
Page 15 of 42
-
This is in response to the letter drafted on your behalf by Commission Counsel Murphy dated May 24, 2002, as amended and supplemented by the letter dated June 14, 2002, in which you request our opinion as to the validity of two recent appointments to vacancies on the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (hereinafter CHRO).
-
You requested an opinion of this Office as to whether former State Treasurer Paul Silvester had the authority to exempt the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority (the "Tribe") from the Second Injury Fund ("the Fund") assessment, required of all state employers pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-354, and to bind the Fund to an apparent agreement for this purpose.
-
You have requested our opinion on whether or not the provisions of Chapter 250a of the Connecticut General Statutes would prohibit a proposed business joint venture involving the Pilot Corporation ("Pilot") and Marathon Ashland Petroleum ("MAP") from operating a retail service station at the Pilot travel center in Milford, Connecticut.
-
This is in response to your request for an opinion on whether the Watertown Scholarship Committee is eligible to receive a raffle permit. The central issue is whether this type of committee is an educational or charitable organization as required by Conn. Gen. Stat. §7-172(5).
-
You have requested our opinion on whether religious organizations are eligible to accept awards in the Arts Presentation Grant Program (Grant Program) of the Connecticut Commission on Culture and Tourism
-
You have asked for my opinion whether the contract entered into by the Department of Social Services (DSS) with the Community Health Network of Connecticut, Inc.(CHN) to provide medical services to eligible clients under the State-Administered General Assistance program (SAGA) is a personal service agreement which must comply with the competitive bidding or competitive negotiations provisions of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 4-212 et seq.
-
On behalf of the Council of Environmental Quality ["CEQ"] you sought this office’s formal opinion as to a number of questions regarding the Connecticut Environmental Policy Act.
-
In your memorandum dated November 16, 2000, you have in essence asked us for an update of an informal opinion dated March 18, 1991 regarding the maximum permissible deviation from strict mathematical equality courts have allowed in reapportionment plans. Your inquiry comes in connection with the Commissioner of Education's statutory duty under Conn. Gen. Stat. §10-63q to notify each regional board of education and each chief executive officer of each town within a regional school district whether or not representation on the respective regional boards of education is "consistent with federal constitutional standards."
-
Thank you for your letter requesting my opinion on whether the Council on Probate Judicial Conduct (“the Council”) has jurisdiction over a complaint concerning alleged misconduct committed during a Judge of Probate’s term of office, but not filed until after the expiration of the judge’s term
-
This letter responds to your request for a formal opinion on whether the Department of Children and Families (DCF) is prohibited by the federal Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. § 290dd-2 (the Federal Act) from disclosing to the Office of the Child Advocate (OCA) certain substance abuse treatment records that you requested pursuant to your authority under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46a-13m.
-
You have requested our opinion of whether renewal of the certificate of authorization of a private occupational school on the basis of the school's institutional accreditation by an accrediting agency recognized by the United States Department of Education (USDOE) pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. §10a-22b(a), in lieu of the Connecticut Department of Higher Education's (DHE's) evaluation, effectively relieves that school of compliance with the requirements of Conn. State Ag. Regs. §10a-22k-5(f) regarding the contents and maintenance of a private occupational school's student attendance records so that the school is subject only to the student attendance record-keeping requirements, if any, of the particular USDOE recognized accrediting agency.
-
This is in response to the request for advice from your department as to the proper interpretation of P.A. 00-139. Section 1(b) of the act provides subject to certain specified exceptions, that "(no) state agency may disclose to the public an individual’s photograph or computerized image in connection with the issuance of an identification card or other document by such state agency, unless such individual has provided his or her express consent for such disclosure."
-
Honorable Dennis Kerrigan, Chairman, Formal Opinion 2007-002, Attorney General State of Connecticut
In your letter dated August 15, 2006 you have asked this office to render a formal opinion concerning the service of capias mittimus by state marshals. Your letter raises the following questions
-
Your agency has asked for an opinion on whether the Connecticut Siting Council (“Council”) has jurisdiction over the siting of municipal towers pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 16-50i (a)(6)
-
You have requested our advice on whether a creditor of a person licensed as a first mortgage lender can collect on the bond required to be maintained by the licensee pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. §36a-492.