5. COMMUNICATIONS
10-1 roll call vote to enter into Executive Session with legal counsel for the City, in
accordance with Exemption Seven Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 30A Section
21(a)(7), to comply with, or act under the authority of, any general or special law or
federal grant-in-aid requirements, in order to act on the periodic review of those
executive session minutes listed herein to determine if release of records is
appropriate at this time.
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
April 29, 2025, Paper 222-25
March 11, 2025, Paper 142-25
March 4, 2025, 117-25
February 25, 2025, 116-25
February 11, 2025, 83-25
February 4, 2025, 61-25
September 26, 2023, 335-23
September 12, 2023, 316-23
October 25, 2022, 425-22
A motion was made by Councillor Sica, seconded by Councillor Simonelli, to retain
said meeting minutes in continued non-disclosure until the City Solicitor
determines the time frame for the appeal process has been exhausted, due to the
determination that publication would defeat the lawful purpose of the Executive
Session M.G.L. c. 30A, s. 22(f) as the time frame for appeal options has not yet
expired and attorney-client privilege remains. The motion was approved by the
following roll call vote:
Yea: Colón Hayes, Crowe, Condon, Linehan, Luong, McDonald, Sica, Simonelli,
Taylor, Winslow
Nea: O’Malley
Absent: Zero
Sponsors: Amanda Linehan
A motion was made by Councillor Sica, seconded by Councillor Simonelli, that
the Communication be placed on file. The motion carried by a unanimous vote.
A representative from the Solicitor's Office will follow up on Paper 73-26 with an
update to the Council on the investigation into the Open Meeting Law Complaint
filed by Bruce Friedman of 8 Marvin Street on January 21, 2026, related to the
emergency meeting of January 20, 2026, which was posted under the
provisions of M.G.L. c. 30A, 20(b).
The basis of this OML complaint is that on January 19, 2026 the City Council posted an
emergency meeting to enter into Executive Session for the evening of January 20 to take
up such business that was unknown to the Body 48 business hours prior, under the
provisions of M.G.L. c. 30A s. 20(b).
Assistant City Solicitor Prasanna Rajasekaran appeared before the Council to report
back on the findings of the investigation, stating the meeting notice was posted as soon
as was reasonably possible therefore no violation exists. He further explained the
definition of emergency relative to this situation, the reasoning behind why the meeting
was necessary, and legal precedent to other rulings showing that settlement negotiations
may be considered emergencies.
The full report may be found attached to the history or Paper 73-26 and will also be