Open Meeting Law and Coronavirus Update

/

On March 12, 2020, Governor Baker issued an Order suspending certain provisions of the Open Meeting Law that governs various public meetings, such as the meetings of Zoning Boards, Planning Boards, Conservation Commissions, and many others.  The Governor’s Order is intended to protect public health, while allowing municipalities and the Commonwealth to continue to function lawfully during this difficult time.

Specifically, the Order relieves public bodies from the requirement to hold in-person meetings, provided that adequate alternative means of public access are provided.  This may include conference calls, video conferences, or other means, provided that the members of the public body and the public may interact in real time and at no cost to the public.  The Order also permits members of public bodies to participate by remote access, suspending the requirement that a quorum of a board must attend a meeting in-person.

The Governor’s Order should allow many public boards to function remotely over the coming weeks and to carry on their business and duties.  It appears the practical means of implementing remote public hearings will be determined on a town-by-town or board-by-board basis, and preparation for conducting business in this manner is likely still very much being developed.

Despite the unprecedented challenges created by Covid-19 (coronavirus) Johnson & Borenstein remains fully operational during this time and ready to represent and protect our clients’ interests and objectives on all fronts,  By taking practical protective measures at our Andover office and by leveraging our robust technical infrastructure and cloud computing capabilities, we remain available to you.  Please do not hesitate to reach out to us.

SJC Affirms Test for Standing in Zoning Appeals

/

In a highly unusual move, only one day after hearing oral argument, the Supreme Judicial Court reversed the Appeals Court decision in Murchison v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Sherborn, which concerned the test for establishing standing in land use cases, and reaffirmed what had previously been considered the undisputed  legal standard.

Read More

Johnson & Borenstein win subdivision appeal against Town of Lunenburg in Land Court

/
Johnson & Borenstein win subdivision appeal against Town of Lunenburg in Land Court

The Land Court has issued a decision in favor of Johnson & Borenstein’s client, O’Brien Homes, against the Town of Lunenburg Planning Board, reversing the Board’s denial of subdivision plans and clearing thefor development of 135 residential lots. The Court invited the developer to proceed with its bad faith claim against the Town.

Read More

Appeals Court Affirms Anti-SLAPP Relief Not Available in Land Court Try Title Action Where Defendants Named Based on Claim of Property Rights, Not Petitioning Activity

/
Appeals Court Affirms Anti-SLAPP Relief Not Available in Land Court Try Title Action Where Defendants Named Based on Claim of Property Rights, Not Petitioning Activity

The Appeals Court has affirmed a Land Court judge’s decision that relief under the anti-SLAPP statute was not available to certain defendants in a try title action where their inclusion in the litigation was based upon their activities described in an affidavit filed with the municipality, rather than the filing of the affidavit itself.

Read More