Applicant’s counsel cites open-meeting law violations; board to receive training

Counsel for Private Oversight LLC told the Templeton Planning Board on April 29 that two open‑meeting law complaints had been filed alleging that the planning board discussed Gardner subdivision matters at meetings on Feb. 25 and March 11 without adequate agenda description. Counsel asked that the board chair complete in‑person open‑meeting‑law training and that the board acknowledge the violations.

The complaints describe two instances: first, discussion at the Feb. 25 meeting about Gardner subdivision proceedings that was not listed on the agenda; second, a March 11 discussion described in counsel’s notice as an agenda item titled generically “Private Oversight, LLC – chair update,” which counsel said did not adequately describe that the discussion concerned whether to appeal a Gardner planning board subdivision decision and therefore should have included litigation‑related particulars on the agenda.

Counsel said the applicant had no opportunity to appear or present at the Feb. 25 meeting and asked the board for training and an acknowledgment of the procedural violation. Board members and other speakers disputed some of counsel’s characterizations during a strongly worded exchange: several board members defended raising local safety concerns and said they had acted to protect Templeton residents, while counsel and other members reiterated the need to afford property owners an opportunity to present their case and follow open‑meeting‑law notice requirements.

Planning board leadership said they would arrange open‑meeting‑law training for the board; staff indicated training materials were included in board packets and that training dates would be coordinated. No formal sanction or written acknowledgment by the board was recorded at the meeting; staff said they would work with legal counsel to schedule training and follow up with the parties.