AG's office finds Sterling board violated meeting law

AG's office finds Sterling board violated meeting law

By Joshua Lyford CORRESPONDENT

STERLING — In two recent decisions, state Attorney General Martha Coakley's office has found that the Board of Selectmen violated the state's Open Meeting Law and warned that future violations may result in nullification of votes and evidence of intent to violate the law.

The attorney general's office received a number of citizen complaints in regard to alleged Open Meeting Law violations by the town's selectmen. They included inadequate meeting notices, failure to follow requisite procedure, improper discussion and votes during executive session, deficient meeting notes and deliberation outside of a public meeting.

In one case, the board failed to follow proper posting requirements for meetings and executive sessions, and failed to record certain required information in the minutes, the attorney general's office ruled.


In 10 of 11 notices posted for meetings between Dec. 5, 2012, and May 8, 2013, the board failed to list the topic for its executive session with sufficient specificity, according to a Dec. 30 ruling from Assistant Attorney General Amy L. Nable.

In her 15-page decision, Ms. Nable also said selectmen needed to disclose whose contracts would be discussed in executive session, rather than simply voting to go into executive session "regarding contract negotiations."

In addition, she said the board improperly executed behind closed doors the contracts for the town administrator, police chief and the union representing police dispatchers.

"Public bodies may agree on terms with individual non-union personnel in executive session, but the final vote to execute such agreements must be taken by the public body in open session," according to the ruling.

The attorney general's office said the board sought to remedy the violations by informing the public of the improper votes and ratifying them in open meetings, but such an action is not a sufficient remedy.

The attorney general ordered board members to attend a training session on the law or view an online training video. Board members have 30 days to certify they have attended live training or reviewed the online video.

Amrith Kumar was among those who lodged complaints against the board. He believes strongly in the transparency provided by the law.

"This isn't about whether or not I was right or wrong, or if the town broke the law or didn't break the law," said Mr. Kumar. "This is about members of the public knowing what is going on in town and that citizens have trust and faith in the process of government."

In the second ruling Ms. Nable said the board violated the open meeting law by deliberating via email and in person outside of an open meeting in creating a letter to the editor last April.