US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC : http://boston.indymedia.org/
Boston.Indymedia
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Testimonies
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News :: Politics
Boston City Council's Michael F. Flaherty's systematic failure to comply with the Open Metting Law
29 Mar 2006
http://electkevin.us/JudgmentOnOMLCase.pdf
03/27/2006 18:12 FAX 617 367-4024 Boston Globe CITY HALL 001

Commonwealth of Massachusetts

SUFFOLK, ss.

SUPERIOR COURT
Civil Action No. 05-01798

KEVIN McCREA & others^1
^1 Shirley Kressel and Kathleen Devine
v.
MICHAEL FLAHERTY and the BOSTON CITY COUNCIL

FINDINGS AND ORDER ON
DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Plaintiffs, Kevin McCrea ("McCrea"), Shirley Kressel
("Kressel"), and Kathleen Devine ("Devine"), filed this action
seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.

The plaintiffs' complaint alleges violations of the Open Meeting
Law, G.L. c. 39 ss23A-C ("the Open Meeting Law"), by the
defendants, the Boston City Council and its President, Michael
Flaherty (collecively referred as "the Council").

Specifically, the plaintiffs challenge the legality of certain
meetings held in which various members of the Council were
present on the following dates:
June 3, 2003,
June 19, 2003,
August, 14, 2003,
September 23, 2004,
October 21, 2004,
November 18, 2004,
December 15, 2004
January 13, 2005,
February 17, 2005,
January 20, 2005, and
March 24, 2005.^2
^2 Although there was a public hearing on December 15, 2004, the
plaintiffs allege that an unlawful closed hearing was
held prior to the public hearing.

In addition to alleging that there were violations of the
Open Meeting Law on particular dates, the plaintiffs also claim
that the alleged repeated violations constitute a "systematic"
failure to comply with the requirements of the statute.

03/27/2006 18:12 FAX 617 367-4024 Boston Globe CITY HALL 002

The Council denies the plaintiffs' allegations that
violations occurred as to the meetings held on
January 13, 2005,
January 20, 2005,
February 17, 2005, and
March 24, 2005

In addition to denying that any violations have occurred, the
Council takes the position that the December 15, 2004 meeting
cured any violations which may have occurred on earlier
occasions.

This Court has previously ruled that the plaintiffs may
not maintain an action to seek invalidate the December 15, 2004
vote because it is time barred pursuant to the strict twenty-one
day statute of limitation of actions provision of Section 23B
Memorandum of Decision and Order on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss
Pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), 6.

However, the plaintiffs also seek injunctive relief, including an
order compelling the Council to comply with the Open Meeting Law
at future meetings.

This matter is now before the Court on Defendants' Motion
for Summary Judgment pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. 56 on the basis
that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that the
plaintiffs have no likelihood of proving that they are entitled
to the injunctive relief sought.

For the reasons stated below, the
Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED and
summary judgment is GRANTED in favor of the plaintiffs
pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. 56(c).

[ more... ]
http://electkevin.us/JudgmentOnOMLCase.pdf
http://electkevin.us/JudgmentOnOMLCase.pdf
03/27/2006 18:12 FAX 617 367-4024 Boston Globe CITY HALL 001

Commonwealth of Massachusetts

SUFFOLK, ss.

SUPERIOR COURT
Civil Action No. 05-01798

KEVIN McCREA & others^1
^1 Shirley Kressel and Kathleen Devine
v.
MICHAEL FLAHERTY and the BOSTON CITY COUNCIL

FINDINGS AND ORDER ON
DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Plaintiffs, Kevin McCrea ("McCrea"), Shirley Kressel
("Kressel"), and Kathleen Devine ("Devine"), filed this action
seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.

The plaintiffs' complaint alleges violations of the Open Meeting
Law, G.L. c. 39 ss23A-C ("the Open Meeting Law"), by the
defendants, the Boston City Council and its President, Michael
Flaherty (collecively referred as "the Council").

Specifically, the plaintiffs challenge the legality of certain
meetings held in which various members of the Council were
present on the following dates:
June 3, 2003,
June 19, 2003,
August, 14, 2003,
September 23, 2004,
October 21, 2004,
November 18, 2004,
December 15, 2004
January 13, 2005,
February 17, 2005,
January 20, 2005, and
March 24, 2005.^2
^2 Although there was a public hearing on December 15, 2004, the
plaintiffs allege that an unlawful closed hearing was
held prior to the public hearing.

In addition to alleging that there were violations of the
Open Meeting Law on particular dates, the plaintiffs also claim
that the alleged repeated violations constitute a "systematic"
failure to comply with the requirements of the statute.

03/27/2006 18:12 FAX 617 367-4024 Boston Globe CITY HALL 002

The Council denies the plaintiffs' allegations that
violations occurred as to the meetings held on
January 13, 2005,
January 20, 2005,
February 17, 2005, and
March 24, 2005

In addition to denying that any violations have occurred, the
Council takes the position that the December 15, 2004 meeting
cured any violations which may have occurred on earlier
occasions.

This Court has previously ruled that the plaintiffs may
not maintain an action to seek invalidate the December 15, 2004
vote because it is time barred pursuant to the strict twenty-one
day statute of limitation of actions provision of Section 23B
Memorandum of Decision and Order on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss
Pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), 6.

However, the plaintiffs also seek injunctive relief, including an
order compelling the Council to comply with the Open Meeting Law
at future meetings.

This matter is now before the Court on Defendants' Motion
for Summary Judgment pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. 56 on the basis
that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that the
plaintiffs have no likelihood of proving that they are entitled
to the injunctive relief sought.

For the reasons stated below, the
Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED and
summary judgment is GRANTED in favor of the plaintiffs
pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. 56(c).

[ more... ]
http://electkevin.us/JudgmentOnOMLCase.pdf
See also:
http://electkevin.us/JudgmentOnOMLCase.pdf
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/03/28/council_fined_for_breaking_meeting_law/?page=full

This work is in the public domain
Add a quick comment
Title
Your name Your email

Comment

Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.

Comments

Re: Boston City Council's Michael F. Flaherty's systematic failure to comply with the Open Metting Law
30 Mar 2006
a lot of these closed meetings were about the biolab and the bu workers who got contaminated with biological agents while members of the community were protesting the dangerous lab. flaherty and the rest of the pro-lab mafia are just pigs in wolves' clothing, selling out their own city.
Re: Boston City Council's Michael F. Flaherty's systematic failure to comply with the Open Metting Law
31 Mar 2006
yup is right. there was an article in the boston globe about this and the subtitle was that alot of this was about the biolab.
i cant believe they are actually going to try and build that thing.