Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.

Open Meeting Law subject of debate at meeting

Date: 5/10/2013

By Carley Dangona

carley@thereminder.com

WEST SPRINGFIELD — At the May 6 Town Council meeting, District 3 Councilor George Condon III attempted to add a last-minute item to the agenda and sparked a debate about the rules of the Massachusetts Open Meeting Law (OML).

Condon sought to add an item regarding the possible purchase of the Elks property, located at 429 Morgan Road, for the purpose of having it referred to subcommittee, not for discussion among the councilors.

President Kathy Bourque immediately declined his request, citing it as a violation of the OML.

Town Attorney Simon Brighenti Jr. said, "In the OML, it does allow [last-minute additions] if items do come up subsequent to an agenda being set. The reason this came up is because the ongoing negotiations concluded over the weekend."

Section 20b of the OML states, "Except in an emergency, in addition to any notice otherwise required by law, a public body shall post notice of every meeting at least 48 hours prior to such meeting, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays. In an emergency, a public body shall post notice as soon as reasonably possible prior to such meeting. Notice shall be printed in a legible, easily understandable format and shall contain the date, time and place of such meeting and a listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be discussed at the meeting."

Section 29.03, "Notice Posting Requirements," of the Attorney General's guidelines states, "Except in an emergency, public bodies shall file meeting notices sufficiently in advance of a public meeting to permit posting of the notice at least 48 hours in advance of the public meeting, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, in accordance with M.G.L. c. 30A, sec. 20. In an emergency, the notice shall be posted as soon as reasonably possible prior to such meeting."

It continues, "Meeting notices shall be printed or displayed in a legible, easily understandable format and shall contain the date, time and place of such meeting and a listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be discussed at the meeting. The list of topics shall have sufficient specificity to reasonably advise the public of the issues to be discussed at the meeting. The date and time that the notice is posted shall be conspicuously recorded thereon or therewith."

Section 29.02 defines an emergency: "Emergency means a sudden, generally unexpected occurrence or set of circumstances demanding immediate action."

District 4 Councilor John Sweeney said, "[The provision] is for an immediate need because of an emergent situation."

Bourque offered Brighenti the opportunity to take a recess so he could produce further proof, but added that she would not be adding the item to the agenda during the meeting without calling the Attorney General's office for verification. He declined and the meeting continued.

During the Citizen Speak Out, Mayor Gregory Neffinger approached the podium and said, "I'll come here as a citizen, how does that sound?"

Bourque advised the mayor not to discuss the matter of the Elks property because it was not on the agenda. The mayor began to read a portion of the Massachusetts General Law and was immediately interrupted by Bourque, who called for a 10-minute recess.

Upon return, there was no further discussion of the matter.

At a press conference the following day, Neffinger said, "Any item that's not known to be put on the agenda beforehand can be put on the agenda at the beginning [of the meeting]. If you didn't intend to discuss it prior, it can be put on the agenda."

Neffinger explained that the reason for the addition was the city's free cash is only available for use until July 1 and the matter still has to be reviewed by the governing body of the Elks, so the goal was to move the matter forward in an efficient manner and avoid missing an opportunity for the town.

He said the cost of the parcel is $460,000 and an additional $40,000 would be requested via appropriation of free cash to "stabilize" the property.

He said that there are many proposed purposes for the 20.86-acre parcel, which include the possible creation of athletic fields, the construction of a public safety complex and the opportunity to house a solar field.

Neffinger added that he was also looking into the possibility of breaking the front of the property into 4 parcels for the city to sell."Until I see something different, the sky's the limit. You can always ratchet back your plans," he said.