WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — The Planning Board on Monday morning unanimously voted that it found no violation of the Open Meeting Law by three of its members in regard to its May 4 meeting.

 

On May 8, two days before the recent town election, Luce Road resident David Leja filed the OML complaint alleging improper communication between three members of the five-person board.

 

On Monday morning, the board voted 5-0 to send Leja a response that read, in part, "the Board discussed this alleged violation, and we believe that based on factual evidence regarding the events that occurred between the meetings of April 28 and May 4 that no violation of the OML took place."

 

The board's letter goes on to cite the collaboration that took place between two board members, Sarah Gardner and Ann McCallum, on what came to be known as the "Gardner Amendment" on the Waubeeka Overlay District zoning by-law amendment.

 

The letter points out that a non-quorum of board members can discuss items before the board and consult with town staff, as Gardner and McCallum did in drafting the amendment, which ultimately passed the Planning Board on a 3-2 vote at the May 4 meeting.

 

Both Gardner and Planning Board Chairwoman Amy Jeschawitz presented their colleagues Monday with drafts of a letter that reached the same conclusion but differed slightly in how they laid out the evidence.

 

While Jeschawitz's draft noted that the by-law amendment was created "by town staff members," Gardner suggested - and her colleagues agreed - that the letter should note the original by-law amendment, which came to be known as the Gardner Amendment, was the work of Town Manager Jason Hoch and Town Planner Andrew Groff. The amendment and its several iterations were available for the Planning Board members and the public in Google Docs prior to discussion at the April 28 meeting.

 

According to the Open Meeting Law Guide on the Massachusetts Attorney General's website, a public body must respond to a complaint within 14 days. The complainant has up to 90 days to request the AG's office to review the complaint.

 

Leja did not attend Monday morning's special meeting of the board. A telephone message left at the number listed for him was not immediately returned.

In an emailed statement on Monday afternoon, Leja said, “I wasn’t made aware that my complaint was a topic at the Planning Board Meeting [sic],” even though it was one of two items posted in an agenda on the town’s website on May 12.

Leja went on to say that he would pursue the complaint with the Attorney General’s Office.

Groff told the board he would ask town counsel whether counsel must review the response before it is sent to Leja.

Although three members of the Planning Board were named in the complaint, it is relatively clear that Gardner, who was standing for election for a five-year seat on the Board on May 10, was the main target of the accusation.

 

After the meeting, Gardner characterized the board's response as a straightforward explanation of the board's procedures for sharing documents between meetings, but she expressed disappointment at the level of discourse the town experienced in the days — and hours — leading up to the vote.

 

"Mr. Leja had been online saying all sorts of inflammatory and, to be generous, impolite things," Gardner said, referring to comments Leja made on iBerkshires.com articles after the May 4 meeting. "I think we lost civil discourse in the comments section."

 

Both Gardner and McCallum said the first they heard of the OML complaint was when they were asked about it by a reporter.

 

"I think the newspaper knew about it before the town did," McCallum said.

 

Gardner also indicated that Leja was not alone in making the complaint.

 

"He stated that he was encouraged to file this, and I'd like to know who encouraged him because it was clearly timed to come out on election day," Gardner said.

 

An Open Meeeting Law complaint must be filed within 30 days of the alleged violation. Leja's complaint was filed four days after the alleged violation took place and in time to be publicized before the Town Election.

 

In other business Monday morning, the Planning Board approved a division of the former Spruces Mobile Home Park property that acknowledges that portion of the property that is in North Adams. The Planning Board in North Adams is set to review the same partition later Monday, Groff said.