COURT RULES THAT SCHOOL BOARD E-MAILS ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION

Massachusetts court also finds that superintendent’s performance review is not a personnel matter

By The Associated Press

January 4, 2010 – Boston --The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled e-mails exchanged by members of the Wayland School Committee must be made public under the state's open meeting law.

Thursday's ruling stemmed from a 2005 complaint lodged by a reporter for the Wayland Town Crier.

The district attorney argued the committee violated the law by holding two closed door meetings on the fate of the superintendent and circulating e-mails before the meetings.

The committee argued the e-mails were exempt because they were preliminary communications and the meetings were exempt because they dealt with personnel issues.

The SJC disagreed, ruling the meetings dealt with professional competence, not salary or contract issues.

The court also ruled the e-mails are public since the substance of the exchanges would have been stated orally at the meeting.

LEGAL OPINION: DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT vs. SCHOOL COMMITTEE OF WAYLAND. SJC-10406

High court rules that Wayland board violated open meeting law

By Martin Finucane, Boston Globe Staff

December 31, 2009 02:36 PM -- In the final chapter of a long legal saga, the state's highest court ruled today that an exchange of e-mails among Wayland School Committee members about the performance of the school superintendent violated the state's open meeting law.

The "private e-mail exchange ... violated the letter and spirit of the open meeting law," the Supreme Judicial Court ruled.

"Governmental bodies may not circumvent the requirements of the open meeting law by conducting deliberations via private messages, whether electronically, in person, over the telephone, or in any other form," the court said in a five-page opinion written by Justice Francis X. Spina.

The court rejected the School Committee's argument that "preliminary e-mail communications" between the school committee members were not considered "records of a meeting" and were not subject to the open meetings law disclosure requirements.

The school committee chairman sent out a request for input on the superintendent's performance in June 2004. Three of the four members responded, either to the superintendent or the whole committee.

A reporter for the Wayland Town Crier filed a complaint with the Middlesex district attorney's office alleging that the process of evaluating the superintendent had violated the open meeting law. The district attorney found that the e-mails and two subsequent executive sessions violated the open meeting law and sued in Superior Court.

The Superior Court ruled in favor of the school committee, but the Supreme Judicial Court reversed that ruling today.

“We are pleased with the Supreme Judicial Court's decision in this matter and with the clarification the Court has given regarding the public's important right to access meetings of governmental bodies. We intend to work with school systems in Middlesex County when and where necessary to help ensure their full understanding of the Court’s findings and its resulting implications," District Attorney Gerry Leone said in a statement.

Regina Williams Tate, the attorney representing the school committee, did not return a message seeking comment this afternoon.

Robert Ambrogi, who filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Massachusetts Newspaper Publishers Association, said the opinion was important, among other reasons, because it affirmed that discussion of a government employee's professional competence had to be conducted in public and because it affirmed that an exchange of emails among members of a government board can constitute an open meeting.

He said the latter point had already been generally accepted, but it was the first time the court had specifically ruled on the issue.

LEGAL OPINION: DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT vs. SCHOOL COMMITTEE OF WAYLAND. SJC-10406