The Office of Attorney General William Tong
2001 Formal Opinions
Page 1 of 2
-
You have asked whether annual legislative approval would be required for legislation allocating unappropriated surplus funds under article third, §18(c) of the Connecticut Constitution.
-
You have asked whether the expenditure of state funds to pay for costs related to the nursing home strike, including the cost of mobilizing the National Guard and the expedited payment to nursing home operators of the cost of replacement workers, would violate any state or federal labor laws.
-
You have inquired whether the provisions of Special Act No. 01-7 (S.A. 01-7), and in particular Section 5 of the Special Act, empower the Hartford School Building Committee, created by the Special Act, to hire a school construction or program manager of its choosing, without having to comply with the strictures and mandates of the Hartford City Charter and various municipal ordinances or regulations addressing the purchase of goods and professional services by the city.
-
Honorable George Jepsen, State Capitol, 2001-006 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
You have requested an opinion concerning the scope of the Governor’s authority to deploy the National Guard in the context of a nursing home strike at a number of nursing homes across Connecticut. In particular, you ask whether the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA") would limit state activity that would "tend to favor, by intent or effect, either side in a labor dispute."
-
I am writing in response to your request for a formal opinion regarding the effect of E-Sign (Public Law 106-229; Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act) on Connecticut’s electronic records and signatures laws.
-
Your Department has asked our opinion whether Section 6 of Public Act 00-201 requires that an owner of a residential underground heating oil storage tank system contract with a registered contractor for all work necessary for the removal or replacement of that tank system, and remediation as may be necessary, in order for the Underground Storage Tank Petroleum Clean-Up Account Review Board ("Review Board") to reimburse eligible costs.
-
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 letter is in response to your request for a formal legal opinion regarding the authority of the Chief Court Administrator, the Honorable Joseph Pellegrino, to eliminate the Connecticut Superior Court’s Geographical Area 16 ("G.A. 16") by closing the G.A. 16 courthouse in West Hartford and expanding the boundaries of G.A. 14 to incorporate all of the towns that are currently in G.A. 16.
-
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.
-
You have asked the extent of the responsibility and potential liability of the Department of Environmental Protection (hereinafter "DEP"), regarding the marking, through signage (beacons) and/or barrier floats, of potentially hazardous state-owned dams. The issue involved affects 15 to 20 sites statewide. This opinion is limited to water retention dams only.
-
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."
-
Senator George Jepsen, State Capitol, 2001-015 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
In response to your request, this is a formal opinion regarding whether advanced practice registered nurses ("APRNs"), licensed nurse-midwives and physician assistants in Connecticut are authorized to dispense, prescribe and administer the drug mifepristone (brand name "Mifeprex", also known as "RU-486") to women in licensed clinics for the purpose of terminating early pregnancies in a non-surgical manner.
-
Senator George Jepsen, State Capitol, 2001-003 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
In response to your request, this is a formal opinion regarding whether advanced practice registered nurses ("APRNs"), licensed nurse-midwives and physician assistants in Connecticut are authorized to dispense, prescribe and administer the drug mifepristone (brand name "Mifeprex", also known as "RU-486") to women in licensed clinics for the purpose of terminating early pregnancies in a non-surgical manner.
-
The Auditors of Public Accounts have notified this Office of what they consider to be an irregularity in the delegation of purchasing authority from the Department of Information Technology ("DOIT") to the Department of Social Services ("DSS") in connection with the selection of a contractor to administer and develop a management information system for DSS’s consolidated Child Care Assistance Program. Specifically, the Auditors express the opinion that the delegation of authority in question, if permitted under the Connecticut General Statutes, should have been made in writing, rather than given verbally, as appears to have been the case. The Auditors have asked whether this Office agrees with their position and, if so, they have suggested that we inform you.