In its September 20th response, under Exemption (f), the Department again cites an ongoing prosecution by the Attorney Generals Office of another case involving Troop E overtime abuse. The Department goes on to clarify that the withheld internal affairs file . . . does relate to the Troop E payroll irregularities and overtime abuse investigation.

We note, however, that the Attorney General's Office generally discourages the use of abbreviations or acronyms on meeting notices, see OML 2014116, particularly where the acronym used is not widely understood by members of the public. See OML 2015-197. The use of the broad term "all projects" on the meeting notice presents a different question.

On August 14, 2015, the Attorney General's Office issued a determination finding that the Council had violated the Open Meeting Law. On September 11, 2015, the Council posted notice for a meeting to be held on September 15, 2015.1 This meeting notice listed many topics for discussion, but it did not mention the August 14, 2015 letter from this office.

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, the response, and a description of any remedial action taken. G.L. c. 30A, 23(b); 940 CMR 29.05(5).

Based upon an October 4th conversation between a Public Records Division attorney and a Town representative, the Town indicated that it does not possess a copy of the requested 990 Form filed with the Attorney Generals Office. Please be advised that where a public entity contracts with a third party to fulfill its public duties, and the public entity exercises control over that third party, an agency relationship is created.

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 the draft document related to an executive session. Conclusion Accordingly, the School is ordered to provide Ms.

Duty to Respond As noted in the November 1st determination, the School is reminded that the Attorney Generals Office (AGO) has previously found that the School is a public entity subject to the Public Records Law and has previously directed the School to respond to public records requests. See AGO letter dated October 20, 2022.

Given that an interpretation of the Open Meeting Law falls within the authority of the Attorney Generals Office (AGO) and not this office, I decline to address those issues in this determination. See G. L. c. 30A, 23. Consequently, I encourage Ms. Rindlisbacher and the Commission to contact the AGO for a determination on the status of the records used in executive session.