Please be advised that in a 2019 decision from the Attorney Generals Office (AGO) regarding a similar matter involving employee allegations and complaints, the AGO indicated it was not persuaded that the custodian was required by the Public Records Law to release the responsive complaints, even in redacted form. See AGOs December 6, 2019 letter regarding SPR19/515 Determination of the Supervisor (December 6, 2019).

The City asserts "[a]ny records 'received or made by City employees which talk about FBI, the Attorney General's Office, or any other law enforcement agency' would be confidential by their terms and therefore exempt from production under exemption (f)." You further contend that "[w]ithholding materials that could compromise investigative efforts if disclosed is critical to a thorough investigation.

First, the Board states in its response that the Attorney Generals office has never interpreted the topic of Select Board Reports and Announcements or any reasonably equivalent [topic] . . . as requiring specific itemization . . . . We disagree.

Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General General Counsel's Office One Ashburton Place Boston, MA 021 08 Dear Attorney Tarrow: I have received the petition of David P. Russman, Esq. appealing the response of the Office of the Attorney General- Consumer Protection Division (AGO) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66 10(b); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2). Specifically, Attorney Russman requested a copy of: 1.

Assistant Attorney General/Records Access Officer Office of the Attorney General One Ashburton Place Boston, MA 02108 Dear Attorney Tarrow: I have received the petition of Susan Bach appealing the response of the Office of the Attorney General (Office/AGO) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On September 10, 2021, Ms.

[a]t this point, both the District Attorney's [O]ffice and the Attorney General's [O]ffice are declining criminal charges." Based on this information, it is unclear how the criminal investigation is active and ongoing and why there remains a concern for potential witnesses and jurors when pursuing criminal charges has been declined and no charge has yet been filed in relation to the investigation as stated in your August 28th response.

Furthermore, when discussing the application of Exemption (c) to withhold records concerning professional qualifications, the Attorney General's Office opined that professional training and experience were not exempt from disclosure under Exemption (c) to the Public Records Law. 1976-77 Op. Atty Gen. Mass. 157 at 12. ("It is my opinion that educational and professional training and experience are not exempted from disclosure by exemption (c).").

LaVallee Assistant General Counsel University of Massachusetts Amherst 300 Whitmore Administration Building Amherst, MA 01003 RE: Open Meeting Law Complaints Dear Attorneys DeAngelo, Papanikolau, and LaVallee: The Attorney General's Office reviewed a complaint by Ronald R.

A review of the Towns website shows that 1 We remind the Committee of the requirements in the Open Meeting Law 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 Generals Office a copy of the complaint and a description of any remedial action taken. 940 CMR 29.05(5); G.L. c. 30A, 23(b). 2 For the sake of