F.O.I. Act--Can city of Eureka Springs legally pay for defense of mayor and city council members who are alleged to have violated the FOIA? No.

STATE OF ARKANSAS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL JUSTICE BUILDING, LITTLE ROCK 72201 STEVE CLARK (501) 371-2007 ..s TORNEY GENERAL OPINION NO. 85-124 May 28, 1985 Honorable Lonnie P. Clark State Representative P.O. Box 307 Berryville, AR 72616 Dear Representative Clark: ~ This opinion is written in response to your request concerning city payment for the legal defense of local officials. IN Hall v. Thompson, Mayor, 283 Ark. 26 (1984), the Arkansas State Supreme Court stated: There is no statutory authority in Arkansas allowing payment of attorney's fees for public officials and employees when they are terminated or charged with criminal offcenses. Even if a public employee is wrongfully discharged and subsequently ordered reinstatment, he is not authorized to collect attorney's fees from public funds. The City of Eureka Springs does not have any statutory authority to pay for the egal defense of the mayor and city counsel members who were allegedly in violation of the Freedom of Information Act. The foregoing opinion, which I hereby approve, was prepared by Chief Deputy Attorney General Rodney Parham. Sincérely, the TRVZ | CLARK Attorney General SC/RP/1 jm