Worcester broke the law and lied
And the new City Solicitor is backing it.
And the state probably won't do anything about it
Mayor Petty's bias broke the open meeting law but because we didn’t catch it quick enough, the record will probably continue to pretend he was right all along. The law department is of course also arguing that he’s right.
I’m talking about this moment in this video
First and foremost, read the first page of the Massachusetts Open Meeting Law Complaint Form because it’s super powerful for creating accountability. It forces the discussion among a group of people within a specific timeframe, and the city has to respond to the attorney general as well as you.
This was my initial complaint.
The new city solicitor responded, in part:
The comments were not related to an item that the City Council discussed. In fact, the resident may have used agenda item 9m as a way to justify speaking, but as depicted in the October 22nd video, the resident did not in fact speak on an item on the October 22nd agenda.
Here’s my cover letter/email in the appeal.
Hello,
Last year the Mayor of Worcester in his role as chair of the city council assumed that because a speaker was Palestinian-American they were speaking on a petition that the clerk had denied, but that was not the case, and the inaccurate meeting minutes based on that determination are a violation of the open meeting law.
The full statement that was allowed was "My name is Orla. I am a Worcester resident. I am a Palestinian American and I want to speak on item 9M and the city solicitors judgement. The clerk denied our petition for a ceasefire in Gaza just minutes before the agenda was set. Allow me to explain the importance of this resolution. I am the grandaughter of nakba survivors..."
The speaker was interrupted by someone in the audience who screamed "wait a minute" and then the chair, Mayor Petty, stated "I'm sorry, it's not on the agenda I have to rule you out of order"
The minutes for this meeting inaccurately state that she "spoke in favor of an item not listed on the agenda"
Explaining her perspective and family lineage in regards to an item the clerk and solicitor had just denied was quite relevant, as 9M on the City Council Agenda that evening was the requesting that the city require employees of the law department have a basic comprehension and familiarity with constitutional law.
In support of what this person would have said if they had been allowed to speak, the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts sent a letter to the Worcester City Council, including Mayor Joe Petty, City Clerk Nikolin Vangjeli, and former City Solicitor Michael Traynor, dated Monday, December 9, expressing "serious concerns” that the application of council rules to prohibit consideration of a citizen petition is unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination and called upon the city “to restore the resolution to the Council’s agenda for consideration no later than the first Council meeting in January 2025.” which they complied with. It was after this meeting that I discovered the discrepancy in the minutes.
Also on on December 9th 2024 the Department of justice announced that it had found that the city of Worcester City of Worcester engages in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives people of rights secured by the U.S. Constitution and federal law. To address the City of Worcester Law departments viewpoint discrimination, something that people who have a basic comprehension and familiarity with constitutional law they would be familiar with, the speaker needed to explain their perspective - but they were unfortunately not allowed to do by the meeting chair.
As I understand it, she was expressing her viewpoint, in clear contrast to the viewpoint that was allowed by the Worcester city solicitor in a petition initially penned by Mayor Petty, but brought forward by councilor Bergman, that the Worcester city council adopted on October 17, 2023 for the City of Worcester to "condemn the recent barbaric and inhuman taking of hostages in Israel" without addressing the ongoing genocide and colonization of Palestine by Israel. Furthermore, the speaker did not in fact state whether they were speaking in support, or opposed to item 9M, as the chair muted their microphone and Worcester Police Captain Matthew Early escorted them away from the podium before they were allowed their two minutes and were able express a position on the item they were speaking on.
I am appealing this complaint, seeking that the City of Worcester correct the meeting minutes to accurately document that the speaker attempted to speak on item 9M but was still ruled out of order by the meeting chair as initially requested in my open media complaint filed with the city January 5th 2025 I have attached my attempt to resolve this directly with the city. Thank you for your consideration in this matter,
David Webb
After acknowleding my complaint in part and citing the open meeting law, our new city attorney says
She’s right, it’s past 30 days, and I probably can’t do anything about it.
But I had seen this as an opportunity for the new city solcitor to create accountability, and am dissapointed but not suprised. We’re not off to a great start.