AMHERST — A resident who has questioned aspects of the Jones Library’s expansion and renovation project is bringing an Open Meeting Law complaint against the library’s elected trustees, contending the board improperly went into executive session at two meetings last month.
Jeff Lee of South East Street, a writer for The Amherst Indy blog, argues in his Oct. 26 complaint to the state attorney general’s office that trustees entered into closed-door session after President Austin Sarat cited the exemption for discussing litigation strategy, known as Purpose 3, under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 30A, Section 21(a)(3), without identifying the litigation.
“The chair did not identify the litigation to be discussed. He did not state the case name, the court, or the other party, and he did not say whether the board is a plaintiff or defendant, or whether a lawsuit has been filed or is only threatened,” Lee wrote.
Lee said he filed the complaint because he doesn’t know what litigation trustees were discussing.
Agendas for the trustee meetings on both Oct. 15 and Oct. 22 list the executive session and cite the reason for the session as “to discuss strategy with respect to litigation; as an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the litigating position of the body.”
If Lee prevails in his case, he asks that the case be identified by docket number and that the parties involved be known, that trustees admit a violation and that the executive session minutes be released, when appropriate.
On Nov. 4, the trustees met again to address the complaint, with the agenda stating they would “acknowledge receipt of complaint, review and discuss response, vote to take any remedial action, if appropriate, and authorize submission of response by the town attorney.”
No formal response has been finalized yet.
The online “Open Meeting Law Guide and Educational Materials,” published in June 2025 by Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell’s office, states, “Generally, a public body must identify the collective bargaining unit with which it is negotiating or the litigation matter it is discussing before entering into executive session under Purpose 3. A public body may withhold the […] name of the litigation matter if publicly disclosing that information
would compromise the purpose for which the executive session was called.”
It adds: “While we generally defer to public bodies’ assessment of whether the inclusion of such details would compromise the purpose for an executive session, a public body must be able to demonstrate a reasonable basis for that claim if challenged.”
In April 2025, Lee sent a letter to the Inspector General of the National Endowment for the Humanities and to the Congressional Department of Government Efficiency Caucus asking about the status of a $1 million grant, money that was to be used to build out a humanities center within the $46.1 million Jones Library project.
