Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General One Ashburton Place Boston, MA 02108 Dear Attorney Tarrow: I have received the petition of Dusty Christensen of the Daily Hampshire Gazette appealing the response of the Office of the Attorney General (AGO) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, lOA; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Mr.

You explain the DAO received the determination on September 5, 2017 and that the DAO is "replying to both this response and a similar order from the Attorney General's office regarding a separate appeal and need additional time to work on a reply." In an email dated September 22, 2017, you indicate the DAO is seeking an extension until October 9, 2017 to provide a response to the order.

DISCUSSION The Open Meeting Law requires that, within 14 business days after receiving an Open Meeting Law complaint, a public body shall review the complaint's allegations; take remedial action, if appropriate; and send to the Attorney General's Office a copy of the complaint and a description of any remedial action taken. G.L. c. 30A, 23(b); 940 CMR 29.05(5).

Within 14 business days of receiving a complaint, a public body must review the complaint's allegations; take remedial action, if appropriate; and send to the Attorney General's Office a copy of the complaint and a description of any remedial action taken. G.L. c. 30A, 23(b); 940 CMR 29.05(4). We take this opportunity to remind the Board of its obligations under the Open Meeting Law.

The Open Meeting Law requires that, within 14 business days after receiving an Open Meeting Law complaint, a public body shall review the complaints allegations; take remedial action, if appropriate; and send to the Attorney Generals Office a copy of the complaint and a description of any remedial action taken. G.L. c. 30A, 23(b); 940 CMR 29.05(5).

This determination addresses complaints 45 and 63. 3 One member of the Committee is an employee of the Attorney Generals Office. The complaints contain no allegations that are specific to the actions of that individual, and that individual played no role in this offices consideration of the complaints. 2 As an initial matter, we decline to review the May 24 complaint as it does not allege a violation of the Open Meeting Law.

Given that an interpretation of the Open Meeting Law falls within the authority of the Attorney Generals Office (AGO) and not this office, I am unable to address those issues in this determination. See G. L. c. 30A, 23. I encourage the parties to contact the AGO for a determination on the status of these issues. Barry H. Johnson Page 3 July 24, 2023 SPR23/1578 Conclusion Accordingly, I will consider this administrative appeal closed.

Given that an interpretation of the Open Meeting Law falls within the authority of the Attorney Generals Office (AGO) and not this office, I am unable to address those issues in this determination. See G. L. c. 30A, 23. If unresolved issues remain, I encourage the parties to contact the AGO for a determination on the Open Meeting Law issues. Please note, Mr.

Given that an interpretation of the Open Meeting Law falls within the authority of the Attorney Generals Office (AGO) and not this Dr. Ian Kelly Page 3 March 25, 2024 SPR24/0748 office, I am unable to address those issues in this determination. See G. L. c. 30A, 23. I encourage the parties to contact the AGO for a determination on the status of the executive session minutes.