Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Government Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council authorizes solicitor to file response in open-meeting-law complaint
Summary
The council authorized the Legal Department to submit a drafted response to an open-meeting-law complaint alleging improper executive-session notice; the solicitor said the response argues the notice sufficiently identified litigation and that the exemption still applied because the case was not fully adjudicated.
The Malden City Council voted Wednesday to authorize the Legal Department to transmit a written response to an open-meeting-law complaint filed by Bruce Friedman regarding the council’s May 12 executive session.
Assistant City Solicitor Samee summarized the city’s drafted response, saying the notice identified the specific litigation at issue and that the exemption allowing an executive session remained appropriate because the case was not "fully adjudicated"—the solicitor noted hearings and the possibility of appeal. The response also addresses a complainant claim that the notice purpose was improper and a claim that there was no detrimental effect on litigation; the solicitor said the law requires only that a detrimental effect may exist, not that it must be shown in the complainant’s view.
Councilor Louang moved, seconded by Councilor Colon-Hayes, to permit the Legal Department to send the response to the complainant and the Attorney General’s office; the motion carried on voice vote, with Councilor O’Malley recorded as 'present.'
