Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solicitor Opinion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Legislative affairs committee seeks city solicitor opinion on meeting exception and employee hearing rights
Summary
The Legislative Affairs Committee voted to recommend that the full council ask the city solicitor whether an ordinance exception allowing subcommittee meetings before 5 p.m. conflicts with the Acts of 1965 requirement that employees have a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The measure was forwarded with a favorable recommendation.
Get email alerts on the Solicitor Opinion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Revere Legislative Affairs Committee voted to forward a request to the city solicitor for a formal legal opinion on whether an exception in the city ordinances permitting certain subcommittee meetings before 5 p.m. could prevent employees from being afforded a "reasonable opportunity to be heard" as required by Chapter 402 of the Acts of 1965.
Clerk-read language described the tension: section 2.03.0.050(e) creates an exception to open meeting requirements for school committee subcommittees that meet before 5 p.m., while Chapter 402 obliges cities to allow employees a reasonable chance to be heard when matters affecting them are considered. Councilor Cogliandro, the maker of the motion, said the committee should obtain the solicitor’s view so the council can determine whether the ordinance’s scheduling exception is consistent with state law. "I would ask that we pass this motion so that the solicitor does offer his opinion on this matter," he said.
After a roll-call vote, the committee issued a favorable recommendation to the full council to request an official opinion from the city solicitor. The clerk recorded the favorable recommendation and the item will be considered by the full city council for action or further direction.
The committee did not take further action beyond forwarding the question to the solicitor; the timing and content of the solicitor’s response were not specified at the meeting.

