By Scott MacKeen
Staff Writer
10/22/09
A town committee is being investigated for a possible violation of the Open Meeting Law. However, several people are disputing claims made to the district attorney’s office that has sparked that investigation. In a 90-page document submitted to the Norfolk County District Attorney’s Office, in which he makes various claims against a number of both public and private citizens, Milton attorney John Hajjar accuses the Gov. Stoughton Trust Land Committee of violating the law by holding closed-door executive sessions without a valid purpose, as they discuss a plan for the Town Farm outside the public eye. He further claims that those advising the committee have unjustly influenced public opinion.
Hajjar’s letter was submitted to the DA’s office Sept. 28. On Oct. 7, the town received a letter from Assistant District Attorney Kevin Power stating that the case is now under investigation.
“In my capacity … I have been assigned to investigate the … complaint, which was received by this office on Sept. 30 that the Gov. Stoughton Trust Land Committee violated the Open Meeting Law … by conducting meetings in executive session without a valid purpose, and/or … also conducting business unrelated to the other-wise valid purpose,” Powers’ letter states.
The Gov. Stoughton Trust Land Committee was appointed early last year to study potential uses for the Town Farm, the 34-acre property once belonging to Colonial Gov. William Stoughton. In his will, Stoughton states the property must be used to benefit the poor of Milton, under the trust of the town’s Selectmen.
Since February, the committee members have entered into executive sessions following the public portions of their meetings. They have consistently stated the purpose of the executive sessions is to discuss “value of real property” and, more specifically, an appraisal of the Town Farm prepared by committee member Webster Collins.
But Hajjar’s letter claims that these closed-door meetings have included discussions beyond what the committee has stated publicly, which would constitute an Open Meeting Law violation.
“We believe there is only one appraisal and it appears that deliberations continued to open-meeting topics repeatedly while still in executive session. We have reason to believe it was to plan for this property privately out of the public view,” Hajjar wrote in his letter to the DA.
Several people referenced in the Hajjar letter disputed his claims when contacted by the Times.
Town Planner Bill Clark, who records the Gov. Stoughton committee’s meeting minutes, disputes claims against him, such as that he “wanted to meet out of the public eye” and “has consistency sided against town residents and with development proponents” since being hired.
While not addressing charges directly, he said he disagrees “with everything [Hajjar] wrote in the letter,” which he said contains “so many inaccuracies.”
Clark said he will “let John Flynn [legal counsel for the town] speak for me” once the Gov. Stoughton committee releases its final recommendation to Selectmen.
Hajjar also claims that the town planner “may have misled the [committee] with his own interpretation of town counsel’s advice as it relates to the Open Meeting Law.”
According to Clark, prior to holding its first executive session in February, the committee sought advice from Flynn as to what it could discuss in private.
“No decision from John Flynn is ever a knee-jerk reaction,” said Clark in a phone interview. “He takes the time and really does the work.”
Flynn’s letter to the committee, dated Feb. 2, states his opinion that “the committee may discuss the [appraisal] report and its contents in executive session and is not required to release the report to the public.”
According to Flynn’s letter, “discussion of the contents of the report in open session and release of the report to the public would be extremely prejudicial to the negotiating position of the [town] in the event that the town wishes to sell of lease all or a portion of the Gov. Stoughton property or to use [it] in a manner that will generate revenue for the Gov. Stoughton trust.”
The first mention of an executive session in the committee’s meeting minutes is for Feb. 2, the same date Flynn’s letter arrived. The minutes state that Clark read the contents of Flynn’s letter to the committee members prior to them entering into executive session.
Although government bodies are required by law to conduct most of their business in public meetings, there are exceptions. Flynn cites Chapter 39, Section 23B (6) of the state general law, which states that committees can hold executive sessions to “consider the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property, if such discussions may have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the [community].”
The Gov. Stoughton committee meeting minutes, which are available on the town’s Web site, show that the committee since February has heard outside presentations regarding Town Farm usage but has not discussed aspects of its own deliberations in public session.
Committee members have submitted a first draft of a recommendation to Selectmen and plan to hold a public forum once the board finishes its review. The Times requested a copy of the draft but was told the document is not yet ready for public release.
Meanwhile, Hajjar says resident Tom Callahan played a role in open meetings violations. Callahan, the executive director of the Massachusetts Affordable Housing Alliance, said he has tried to “present a fair and varied picture” of what could be done at the Town Farm.
He said that many of the accusations Hajjar makes against him are “ridiculous” and “just plain false.”
“We are extremely disappointed that Hajjar is slinging mud at Milton residents who are trying to provide a positive and realistic vision to save Town Farm and fulfill Gov. Stoughton’s will,” Callahan wrote in an e-mail.
When asked in a phone interview, Callahan said he has never sat in on any Gov. Stoughton committee executive sessions or learned what was discussed there.
“Everything I have learned has been from open session. I certainly wasn’t at any executive sessions,” he said.
Although Hajjar says Callahan had insider knowledge that the committee would reject a high-density 288 unit development for the Town Farm, Callahan refutes that claim.
“The first time this was presented, I remember that presentation very clearly … Bob Daylor [who presented several housing options at a meeting last year], before he presented the 288 units, he said, ‘This is something you won’t have to worry about,’” said Callahan. “No one ever took that seriously. It was talked about at length in open session.”
Bob Sweeney, co-chair of the Gov. Stoughton Trust Land Committee, refused to comment, saying he would wait for the DA’s ruling.
Selectmen Chairman John Shields said he has faith in the committee, which he helped appoint.
“These are terrific people who have done this work,” he said. “I think that’s reflected in the report. I’ve read their preliminary report and I think they’ve been very fair.”
Shields added that the committee members have told him they don’t feel they have done anything wrong.
“Just because they filed [a complaint] doesn’t mean it’s true. I’ve been found in violation of the Open Meeting Law before and I still don’t think I did anything wrong,” he said, although he added he would let the legal process play out.
The Times has published Hajjar’s letter to the DA, with some deletions, on Pages 24 and 25 of our October 22 print edition.