NAHANT — A letter from K.P. Law on behalf of the town explains the town’s position on the recent Open Meeting Law violation filed against the town last month.
Resident Kenneth Carangelo originally filed the complaint against the town on March 14. Michael A. D’ortenzio drafted the response, where the firm, which serves as Town Counsel, explained there was no evidence of the town violating the Open Meeting Law.
D’ortenzio said the complaint alleged that the Nahant Board of Selectmen violated the Open Meeting Law by failing to provide substantive responses to a citizen’s questions at a March 5, 2025 board meeting. In the Facebook post where the statement was provided to the public, the questions referred to the town’s ongoing legal battles with Northeastern University.
“The complaint does not allege any cognizable violation of the Open Meeting Law,” he said. “First, the Open Meeting Law concerns how the board conducts its business, not the substantive actions it takes. Second, the law does not require a public body to respond to questions during public comment.”
According to D’Ortenzio, the Open Meeting Law was originally enacted to “eliminate much of the secrecy surrounding deliberations and decisions on which public policy is based.” However, he added that the law does not require public bodies to respond to questions from the public, or even receive public comment at all.
“While the Complainant may disagree with decisions or conduct made by the board at its March 5, 2025 meeting, complaints about the substance of a public body’s deliberations are not implicated by the Open Meeting Law,” he said. “Second, even though the board voluntarily includes ‘citizen’s comment’ on many of its agendas, the law does not require the board to engage with the public.”
He added that the board respectfully submits that the Complainant’s allegations fall outside of the scope of Open Meeting Law, and the Division of Open Government’s review. “Allegations that the board has not responded substantively to public commenters’ questions do not implicate the provisions of the Open Meeting Law,” she said.
“Based on the foregoing, the board respectfully submits that there is no further action to take with respect to the Complaint, as such, the board considers this matter resolved,” he said.
It should be noted that this letter acts as the town’s response to the complainant. The Attorney General has not yet weighed in on the matter, and the complainant has the ability to appeal the findings.
