By Beth David, Editor
The Fairhaven Neighborhood News filed an Open Meeting Law (OML) complaint against the Fairhaven Interim Town Administrator Screening Committee (TA Committee) for a meeting they held on 11/21/24. (The complaint uses the date of 11/22 because we did not know when the committee met because it was not posted and we believed it was the Friday before the 11/25 Select Board meeting, which would have been 11/22, not 11/21.)
In the complaint the FNN alleges that the committee violated the OML by not posting the meeting and an agenda, and asks that the committee create an agenda and minutes.
In his liaison report on 11/25, SB member Andrew Saunders, who is the board’s representative on that committee, said the committee met and that there was some interesting discussion between members, Jeff Osuch and Anne Carreiro. That is how the existence of the meeting became known.
At the 12/2 SB meeting, Mr. Saunders acknowledged that there had been some questions about the TA Committee and the OML. He and Ms. Carreiro told the board that no “substantive” discussion took place, and the initial gathering of the committee members was for scheduling only. The FNN filed the complaint later that week.
In the complaint, the FNN contends that the explanation of meeting only for scheduling is not sufficient.
“They are expecting the public to take their word for it and are not allowing the scrutiny of the public or the press so they can come to their own conclusions, a key element of a healthy democracy,” reads the complaint. “The public has a right to know if a quorum of committee members is meeting, no matter what they discuss. We have a right to watch the meetings and judge for ourselves.”
At their meeting on 12/11/24, the TA Committee addressed the complaint and approved a response that was sent to the FNN.
Mr. Saunders referred to a 2013 decision by the Attorney General responding to a complaint against the Lynn Water and Sewer Commission (OML 2013-145). In that decision, the AG’s office defines deliberation, and notes that scheduling is explicitly excluded from the Open Meeting Law (Chapter 30A Section 18-25). Also excluded is the distribution of other procedural documents or reports as long as no opinion is expressed by a member.
“The relevance of this decision is exactly what we did on November 21st, 2024,” said Mr. Saunders at the TA Committee meeting on 12/11. “We met not to deliberate over the topic of selecting an interim Town Administrator, we met simply to establish a schedule of when we would meet.”
He said they decided their first meeting would be on 11/27 and that meeting was properly posted and their first order of business was to select a chairperson and a clerk.
“Based upon that I do not feel there was any violation of the Open Meeting Law,” said Mr. Saunders, adding he would like to send the letter to the Neighb News saying they were “in error” over what the Open Meeting Law is.
The board voted unanimously to send the letter.
In that official response from the committee, chairperson Jeff Osuch wrote there were “no deliberations, discussions of substantive matters or expression of opinions by members” at the 11/21 “gathering.”
He wrote those communications are “purely administrative” under the OML.
He also explains that the discussions between him and Ms. Carreiro were “personal in nature” and not subject to the OML requirements.
“Based on our review, the Committee does acknowledge the perception of a meeting on November 21, 2024 may exist,” reads the letter. “However, the circumstances of the Committee’s actions on November 21, 2024 being administrative in nature with no deliberations and no sharing of opinions related to matters within the Committee’s jurisdiction prevent it from being defined as a meeting of a public body.”
As of press time, the Neighb News had not decided if it would file the complaint with the AG’s office. The statute requires a complainant to file the complaint with the chairperson of the committee and the town clerk. If the complainant (FNN) is not satisfied with the response from the municipal body, the complainant is required to wait 30 days to file with the AG for a decision.
The original OML complaint filed by the Neighb News, and the response are available below
•••
Click here to download the 12/19/24 issue: 12-19-24 OldTyme
Click here to download the OML complaint: TACommOML_Complaint
Click here to download the OML complaint response: TACommOML_Response
Support local journalism, donate to the Neighb News with PayPal
