FOIA-related charges will not be filed against acting Fort Smith city administrator

Acting Fort Smith City Administrator Jeff Dingman will not face criminal charges from the Arkansas Attorney General’s office related to a finding of his guilt in a civil Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) judgment against the city and Dingman in June.

Dingman’s potential legal liability resulted from a FOIA request made in early May by Fort Smith attorney Joey McCutchen to the city for records related to the hiring of an internal auditor.

The Fort Smith Board of Directors voted April 22 to hire Rebecca Cowan as internal auditor. After it was disclosed she faced a felony charge, the board rescinded the hiring on April 24.

McCutchen filed a lawsuit May 2 claiming the city did not provide documents requested through the FOIA related to the internal auditor issue. He argued that Dingman knew Cowan had a felony charge and did not forward to the board documents from then-Human Resources Director Rick Lolley about her background.

Sebastian County Circuit Court Judge Dianna Hewitt Ladd issued an order June 5 finding that the city and Dingman did violate the FOIA. Based on findings during the hearing, Ladd supported McCutchen’s assertion that Lolley provided background info. Lolley resigned June 7.

McCutchen asked Sebastian County Prosecutor Dan Shue to investigate the matter further, including the possible destruction of documents that were sought in the FOIA request. Shue recused and forwarded the matter to the office of Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin.

In a letter dated Nov. 19 sent by Senior Assistant Attorney General Jeanna Sherrill to Dingman, Dingman was notified he would not face charges related to perjury and the criminal violation of the FOIA. She indicated that while Dingman violated the FOIA, he did not mentally intend to violate the law.

“This office has determined that no criminal charges will be filed on either allegation,” Sherrill wrote in the letter to Dingman. “While the results of the civil suit against you showed the requisite wrongful act occurred, our investigation has not identified any evidence that your wrongful act was accompanied by the requisite mental state. Similarly, there is insufficient proof to bring a perjury charge.”

Fiveable, a social learning platform, notes that the “mental state requirement refers to the necessity for a defendant to have a certain level of mental intent or awareness when committing a criminal act.”

Sherrill also encouraged the city to develop “clear procedures” to better handle future FOIA requests.

“This office advises you to take more care in your handling of FOIA requests and implement clear procedures in your office to ensure FOIA requests are timely and accurately handled,” Sherrill noted in the letter.

It was announced Aug. 5 by the city that the responsibility to respond to FOIA requests would be moved from Dingman to James Gentry, the city’s chief information officer.

Dingman on Nov. 25 sent an email to Mayor George McGill and the board of directors saying no criminal charges would be filed. Following is the language from that email.

“You may recall the complaint lodged to the Sebastian County prosecutor’s office earlier this year including allegations of criminal wrongdoing by me as a result of a Freedom of Information Act request on April 24, 2025. Sebastian County Prosecutor Dan Shue recused his office from the matter and forwarded the complaint to the Arkansas Attorney General’s office where a Special Prosecuting Attorney was assigned to investigate the matter.

“Today I received a letter from the Attorney General’s office indicating that their office has determined that no criminal charges will be filed on the allegations included in the complaint.”

Dingman provided no other comment to Talk Business & Politics about the letter other than his Nov. 25 email.

McCutchen told Talk Business & Politics that the AG decision encourages future bad behavior.

“The decision by the Special Prosecutor is very disappointing,” he said. “It’s another example of a double standard in a public official skating by with no criminal charges while (an) average citizen would have been charged. It’s also troubling that the special prosecutor did not even mention one word about possibly the most serious charge of tampering with public records. Conduct rewarded is conduct repeated.”

Link here for a copy of Sherrill’s letter.