Telegram Editorial on Open Meeting Laws

Great editorial. Please note that neither the minutes for regularly scheduled October meeting Airport Commission or the special November meeting are on-line yet. Could not agree more with this editorial:

Backdoor politics Northbridge, Leominster skirt Open Meeting Law

With disheartening regularity in Massachusetts, public officials choose to ignore their legal obligation to conduct the public’s business in public. Recent attempts to avoid public scrutiny in Northbridge and Leominster are cases in point. With a few exceptions — notably for personnel matters and negotiations where public scrutiny would have adverse effects on a community’s position — the Open Meeting Law requires all meetings of public boards to be posted and conducted in public. The rationale is simple: to safeguard against backdoor dealing that excludes full public discussion and scrutiny. In Leominster this week, Mayor Dean J. Mazzarella cried foul after city councilors postponed action on a series of appropriations, in a move clearly choreographed out of the public eye. The mayor had heard talk in City Hall Monday about the planned action — and, indeed, almost every agenda item was postponed that night. Robert A. Salvatelli, council president, acknowledged one-on-one discussions before the meeting, but said there was no gathering of a council quorum in violation of the law.

There is no reason to suspect nefarious motives, but the fact that councilors likely had nothing to hide makes the prearranged move even more perplexing. As Mr. Mazzarella noted, “Whether it’s a breach of the law or a breach of faith, it’s bad government.” In Northbridge, the violations are still clearer. After investigating a complaint by former Town Manager Michael J. Coughlin, the Worcester district attorney’s office notified the town on Nov. 22 that exchanges of e-mail on public business by the Board of Selectmen and Finance Committee were in violation of the law. Use of e-mail for routine scheduling matters is permissible, but investigators concluded the “voluminous e-mails” to a quorum of board members discussing board business constituted clear violations of the Open Meeting Law. Whatever the boards’ intent, their practices clearly excluded the public. Mr. Coughlin put it succinctly: “There was a government behind a government on computer screens of a select few.”

Open government is good government. Too often, public officials ignore the fact that, in Massachusetts, open government is also the law.