No executive session shall be held until the governmental body has first convened in an open session for which notice has been given, a majority of the members have voted to go into executive session and the vote of each member is recorded on a roll call vote and entered into the minutes, the presiding officer has cited the purpose for an executive session, and the presiding officer has stated before the executive session if the governmental body will reconvene after the executive session.

Mass General Laws on open meetings

If they met before the announced time, and then voted to go into executive session, I see no other way to interpret the part I highlighted than to conclude they broke the open meeting law.

Was the BOS meeting scheduled for 6PM or 7PM?

Molly wrote:

The agenda said 7 pm. to start the meeting unless they made a last minute change. Is that legal?

You can go to the town site and check on it there.

Here is my question--since we know they read this site, and we have discussed this before, they must be getting around it some way. Could they be that stupid to continue to violate open meeting when they have been reprimanded for it before? How can we find this out?

Report it to the district attorney and let him decide.

The district attorney of the county in which the violation occurred shall enforce the provisions of this section.

  Upon proof of failure by any governmental body or by any member or officer thereof to carry out any of the provisions for public notice or meetings, for holding open meetings, or for maintaining public records thereof, any justice of the supreme judicial court or the superior court sitting within and for the county in which such governmental body acts shall issue an appropriate order requiring such governmental body or member or officer thereof to carry out such provisions at future meetings. Such order may be sought by complaint of three or more registered voters, by the attorney general, or by the district attorney of the county in which the city or town is located. The order of notice on the complaint shall be returnable no later than ten days after the filing thereof and the complaint shall be heard and determined on the return day or on such day thereafter as the court shall fix, having regard to the speediest possible determination of the cause consistent with the rights of the parties; provided, however, that orders with respect to any of the matters referred to in this section may be issued at any time on or after the filing of the complaint without notice when such order is necessary to fulfill the purposes of this section. In the hearing of such complaints the burden shall be on the respondent to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the action complained of in such complaint was in accordance with and authorized by section eleven A 1/2 of chapter thirty A, by section nine G of chapter thirty-four or by this section. All processes may be issued from the clerk's office in the county in which the action is brought and, except as aforesaid, shall be returnable as the court orders.

  Such order may invalidate any action taken at any meeting at which any provision of this section has been violated, provided that such complaint is filed within twenty-one days of the date when such action is made public.

  Any such order may also, when appropriate, require the records of any such meeting to be made public, unless it shall have been determined by such justice that the maintenance of secrecy with respect to such records is authorized. The remedy created hereby is not exclusive, but shall be in addition to every other available remedy. Such order may also include reinstatement without loss of compensation, seniority, tenure or other benefits for any employee discharged at a meeting or hearing held in violation of the provisions of this section.

  Such order may also include a civil fine against the governmental body in an amount no greater than one thousand dollars for each meeting held in violation of this section.

(see bottom of page on Mass Open Mtg. laws)

Also, I hope someone is keeping Steve Urbon informed in case he misses something and doesn't regularly read this website.
surbon@s-t.com

Last edited by urneighbor (2009-07-22 08:23:28)

The DA does not investigate open meeting law complaints until someone sends a signed letter to the DA'S office.

Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2009-07-22 10:04:56)

I"m very confused over the crime watch issue. First, they do not report to the police? Second, who do they report to? If they are a civic organization, why do they report to anyone? I can understand a liason relationship with the police department. To add to my confusion, why are we discussing  crime watch in an executive session? Saginut states that he has nothing to do with crime watch, but they say he is there contact.

This is way too confusing. Can someone clear this up for me?

If Crime Watch is nothing more than a civic organization how are they different from the Guardian Angels?

How is giving the Crime Watch old police cruisers any different than if the Guardian Angels organized a Wareham chapter and were also given old police cruisers?

How is giving Crime Watch the authority to write parking tickets any different from giving the same authority to the Guardian Angels?

Who would you rather have running a citizen's crime watch, someone selected by Curtis Sliwa or Bruce S?

Keep sending letters to the DA but cc the state Attorney General and the Massachusetts State Ethics Commission.

I don't think there's a law against publishing a copy of the letters you send here as well and to both Steve Urbon and The Boston Herald and for that matter all the papers and TV news departments.