1996 Formal Opinions

Page 2 of 2

• Mr. Burton S. Yaffie, Secretary, Trumbull Park Business Center, 1996-010 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  The Board of Pardons asked this office the following questions with regard to the possibility of future executions in the State of Connecticut: When is the first execution likely to be scheduled? When will a hearing be required in anticipation of an execution date? On the date of execution? Just before the execution? After all other appeals have been exhausted? Is it necessary for the Board to convene a commutation hearing in all cases whether requested or not? Who could request the convening of this special session: the defendant, his attorney, the Governor, a family member, etc.?

• Reginald L. Jones, Jr., Office of Policy and Management, 1996-003 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  You have requested the opinion and advice of the Attorney General regarding the status of the above-entitled case, and the alternatives that are available for the disbursement of funds that will be received by the state following its resolution.

• Commissioner Reginald J. Smith, Department of Public Utility Control, 1996-006 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  As Chairman of the Department of Public Utility Control ("Department"), you request our advice regarding the application of Section 251(d)(3) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 1996 Pub. L. 104-104 ("Telecommunications Act"). The Telecommunications Act requires state commissions to set wholesale rates for any telecommunication service offered by the local exchange company, in this case the Southern New England Telephone Company ("SNET'), on the basis of retail rates, less avoided costs such as marketing and billing costs. These wholesale services will be purchased by rival telecommunication companies competing against SNET in the local exchange markets.

• Peter N. Ellef, Commissioner of Economic and Community Development, 1996-014 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  This is in response to your request for an opinion inquiring whether the Commissioner of Economic and Community Development ("Commissioner") has the authority to amend the assistance agreement (the "Agreement") between the former Department of Economic Development, now the Department of Economic and Community Development ("DECD"), and the Dun & Bradstreet Company ("Dun & Bradstreet"), and whether such amendment, if permissible, must be submitted to this office for approval.

• Senator William A. DiBella, Connecticut Senate, 1996-020 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  You have inquired as to the proper interpretation of Conn. Gen. Stat. §2-3a, which prohibits employers from discriminating against employees who are members of the general assembly. Specifically, you ask what is included in the term "duties of such office" as used in the statute, whether the "time off" provision contained in the statute applies to campaigning, and who determines the scope of a legislator's duties.