Citizen Portal
Sign In

Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows

Brentwood Select Board schedules nonpublic work session to review large Right-to-Know request

Brentwood Select Board · April 21, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Facing a Right-to-Know (RSA 91-A) request that the board described as thousands of communications, the Select Board agreed to a nonpublic work session to review responsive records, consider redactions with legal counsel, and coordinate production scheduling and notifications.

The Brentwood Select Board agreed April 21 to hold a nonpublic work session to begin review of a large RSA 91-A Right-to-Know request after discussing logistics, legal review and production timelines.

Board members said the request encompasses a very large set of communications (one board member referenced roughly 4,000 emails/communications). Members discussed options: have town counsel review everything (which could be costly), take an initial town-led pass to identify clearly nonresponsive material and then have counsel perform focused redaction review, or produce certain categories of records (meeting minutes, public records) immediately. The board’s town counsel had advised the board that a work session to review documents and determine redactions would be appropriate.

Select board members emphasized the shared responsibility to produce town records rather than leaving work entirely to a single member. Several members raised practical concerns about time, the need to screen out junk or irrelevant items, and whether the requester could be charged for production beyond statutory allowances. Board member discussion referenced RSA 91-A electronic production rules (the transcript notes that the statute allows a per-electronic-communication charge up to $1 but the first 250 electronic communications are free), and members said legal counsel would need to confirm any chargeable items and the appropriate process.

The board agreed to schedule a nonpublic work session to begin the review and redaction process (members discussed several possible dates and settled on a session during the coming week), and directed the chair and town administrator to coordinate a notice that the records are being gathered and will be produced within a reasonable timeframe. The board indicated that detailed redaction decisions and certain sensitive discussions would occur in nonpublic session as permitted by RSA 91-A.