Working group debates redaction rules and whether to remove form field for naming accused individuals

The working group discussed a key design choice for the proposed bias-incident reporting form: whether to include a free-text field (referred to in the meeting as "box 4") that would allow reporters to name alleged perpetrators.

Chair Paul Bohm proposed eliminating box 4 from the public form, arguing that intake specialists can gather identifying details during follow-up and that keeping names on the form increases public-records risk. Bohm said: "So I was recommending, at this point, to eliminate box 4." That recommendation was framed as a risk–reward decision that weighed potential investigative value against harms of publishing names.

Staff liaison Carrie told the group she and town counsel had repeatedly discussed the issue with the select board and emphasized the legal presumption that "any records that the town has are public records, and they're subject to release." Carrie said the proposed revision would reduce liability and make the system work better for the community.

Some committee members urged caution about removing the field entirely. A committee member identified as Aggie said removing the box could prevent collection of contact information from people who lack phones and might be the only opportunity to capture key details. Deborah Dorfman suggested consulting Somerville or other municipalities to learn how they preserve narrative substance while protecting identities, and she warned that intake notes and emails can themselves become public records.

No final decision was recorded; chair Bohm said the question would be revisited and that staff would seek a midpoint solution.