Open meeting violation against West Bridgewater Board of Selectmen upheld

Open meeting violation against West Bridgewater Board of Selectmen upheld

By Amanda Irwin The Enterprise
Posted May 15, 2018 at 4:00 PM
Updated May 15, 2018 at 8:08 PM

On appeal the board was deemed in violation of opening meeting laws, but the ruling has not created more transparency by the board.

WEST BRIDGEWATER — The attorney general’s ruling against the West Bridgewater Board of Selectmen for violating open meeting laws was upheld on May 4 on appeal.

However, during the Board of Selectmen meeting in executive session, the board will discuss whether to yet again appeal the decision, according to Chairman Anthony J. Kinahan. The board can appeal the decision within 20 days through the state Supreme Judicial Court.

“We haven’t actually discussed it yet formally as a board, but we’re going to do that tomorrow night,” said Kinahan Tuesday. “We’re unsure of what we’re going to do next. I’m inclined to (appeal).”

The board’s violations occurred during three executive sessions held between January and April 2015, during which the board “discussed the professional competence of nonunion municipal employees in connection with negotiating the employees’ contracts,” according to the memorandum.

“Essentially, it’s about discussing work performance in executive session as opposed to an open meeting,” said Kinahan, who was not serving on the board during the violation.

Contract renewal and performance reviews for the police chief, town accountant, elder services director and the forestry and parks superintendent were discussed during executive sessions, but not during open sessions, which is a violation of open meeting laws. The actions were reviewed by the attorney general following a complaint filed by a private citizen and, as a result, the board was ordered to comply with the open meeting law going forward.

Once the complaint was filed, performance review duties were immediately transferred to the town administrator, according to Kinahan, which he believes creates even less transparency.

“Since the ruling, we (the board) have stopped doing performance evaluations and any type of performance reviews in any capacity,” he said. “I feel, and I believe this is the consensus of the board but I’m not positive, is if it’s not done in executive session, it’s less transparency.”

Kinahan argues it creates less transparency because minutes are recorded in executive sessions, which he states generalizes items discussed including performance reviews, whereas minutes are not recorded when a town administrator handles reviews.


“I don’t think it’s fair to employees. We as selectmen have an obligation to be transparent. But we also has an obligation to employees to be good employers,” he said.

Kinahan said he doesn’t believe it is fair to discuss employees’ performance in open sessions during recorded, on-the-record open sessions, despite the employees’ salaries being funded by taxpayers.

“I think that they elect the leaders to handle that. I support a private business when I go into Dunkin’ Donuts to buy a cup of coffee, but I have no right to say how their employees perform,” he said.

However, unlike business patronage, taxpayers do not have the option to choose what salaries their taxes do and do not fund. But, in accordance with open meeting laws, taxpayers do have a right to know how employees their taxes fund are performing. Kinahan said this is where electing selectmen comes into play.

“That’s where they unseat one of the elected leaders,” he said.

During appeal, the judge determined “the board had violated the open meeting law because it did not first discuss professional competence in an open session as required under Wayland.” The district attorney for the N. Dist. V. School Comm. of Wayland determined the process of discussing municipal employee performance should first be discussed in open session and not doing so “violates the letter and spirit of the open meeting law.”

In the event that the attorney general’s ruling is upheld, whether via a ruling in an appeal with the Supreme Judicial Court or via the board accepting the determination of the Appeals Court, employee reviews and negotiations will continue to be handled by the town administrator rather than discuss in open sessions, according to Kinahan.


“I will never be okay with doing performance evaluations in public session. They would remain with the town administrator,” he said, adding he would prefer the board handle the matters in executive session.

The next Board of Selectmen meeting is 7 tonight at Town Hall.

Staff reporter Amanda Irwin can be reached at airwin@enteprisenews.com