The Select Board will address an open meeting law complaint in executive session Monday night.

The state’s open meeting law regulates how most meetings by public bodies are required to be open to the public. There are some specific exceptions, when topics like personnel issues, litigation strategies, collective bargaining plans and purchasing properties are discussed. Per open meeting law, however, the “minutes of all open and executive sessions shall be created and approved in a timely manner,” which is considered within the next three public body meetings or within 30 days.

According to the complaint reviewed by the Swampscott Tides, the Select Board is accused of “intentionally withholding executive session minutes.”  There are minutes missing from 10 executive sessions since February 5.

“They have only published (posted) two sets of executive session minutes since June 14, 2022,” the complaint sent to the Attorney General’s Office reads. 

Liz Smith, who filed the complaint, noted she requested records from six executive sessions – for January 8, 2025; January 13, 2025; December 18, 2024; December 10, 2024; November 1, 2023; and September 20, 2023 – through the town clerk on May 12. She was allegedly told they needed time to review.

“I was told on May 21, 2025 they were still being reviewed. On June 18, 2025 I was told by the clerk that he would check with the Select Board on the status of my request,” Smith’s statement reads. “On August 12, 2025 I was told the minutes were still under review for redaction. On August 13, 2025 I was told I would now need to file an open meeting law complaint in order to receive the minutes I had requested on May 12.”

Select Board Chair Katie Phelan did not respond to requests by the Swampscott Tides for comment.

Town Clerk Jared LaLiberte told the Swampscott Tides that he directed Smith to the Attorney General’s Office site, which indicates “for a local or municipal public body, you must submit a copy of the complaint to the chair of the public body and to the municipal clerk.”

”The town clerk is the keeper of the records however each board is responsible for the sending of their own minutes to the Clerk’s office for posting,” LaLiberte said.

As of now, the attorney general’s site does not list a complaint against the Swampscott Select Board. A representative from the office also informed the Swampscott Tides that they did not receive an open meeting law complaint on this issue.

Meeting minutes, including those from executive sessions, are required to include summaries of discussions, lists of documents or exhibits used, and records of votes taken. Decisions made as well as a record of votes are also supposed to be documented.

The last executive session minutes that appear on the Swampscott town website is from January 14. The town received the minutes to post on July 2. 

Since then, the Select Board has held 10 executive sessions, on February 10, April 17, May 12, May 27, June 23, July 7, July 23, August 13, August 18, August 26, and September 3. Many of the dates are erroneously written on the site but are reflected in the agendas as the appropriate time.

The executive meetings have mostly been to discuss collective bargaining or litigation. Other issues, according to the agendas, included strategies for interviews – and then later negotiations – for the new town administrator, complaints against a staff member, as well as considering purchasing property. 

“In addition, the Select Board is not reporting at public meetings when they have reviewed executive session minutes, the outcome of that review and the reason for continued withholding,” Smith wrote.

On April 17, the Select Board discussed withholding 100 sets of executive session minutes dating back to January 6, 2021. The February 10, 2025 meeting was included in the discussion. 

“I am also requesting that the Swampscott Select Board review minutes for executive sessions in 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025 and release full or partial minutes for items that no longer fall under the executive session exclusion for confidentiality,” Smith wrote. 

The Select Board discussed at the June 23 executive session withholding or releasing the executive minutes from January 14, January 22, February 10, April 17, May 12 and May 27. It’s unclear what decision, if any, was made.

The August 13 meeting included an agenda item to consider withholding or releasing the executive minutes from April 17, May 27, June 23, July 7 and July 23. Again, the results are not apparent at this time. 

At the September 8 executive session, the Select Board is scheduled to “acknowledge receipt of (an) open meeting law complaint from Elizabeth Smith against the Select Board, dated August 26, 2025; acknowledge and review complaint and discuss response; votes may be taken.”

According to the Attorney General’s Office, after reviewing the complaint the Select Board has 14 business days to “respond to the complaint in writing and must send the complainant a response and a description of any action the public body has taken to address the allegations in the complaint.”

Once the Select Board responds, if Smith is “not satisfied with the public body’s response” she may file a copy of the complaint with the Division of Open Government.

The following item on the agenda for September 8 is to review minutes and discuss withholding or releasing those from April 17, May 27, August 13, August 18 and August 26. 

“I also request that the Select Board follow the guidelines and when they have reviewed minutes, report at their next regular meeting the outcome of the review, which minutes are continuing to be withheld and why,” Smith wrote.