The blogs in question are written by Amherst and Amherst Regional school board members Catherine Sanderson and Richard Hood.
"Amherst School Talk" is a blog written by school committee member Rick Hood.AMHERST - School officials seeking clarification on whether writing or posting on blogs and other online forums could violate the state Open Meeting Law will have to wait until the attorney general’s office weighs in on the matter.
The heads of the Shutesbury, Leverett, Pelham and Amherst school committees and the Amherst Regional School Committee sent a letter to Assistant District Attorney Cynthia Pepyne in May asking for guidance.
Those communities comprise the Amherst-Pelham regional district. “Given that an increasing number of public officials operate blogs dedicated to the work of the committee or board which they serve, specifically school committees in Western Massachusetts, it is our perception that the commonwealth has not yet clearly provided guidance about this emerging form of electronic communication,” the letter stated.
The chairs had asked for a ruling before July 1, when oversight of the Open Meeting Law was transferred from district attorneys to the state attorney general. The law requires state and municipal boards to conduct their business in public, with limited exceptions. With the change in governance Pepyne said she felt that her office’s opinion would not be relevant.
The letter cites the blogs of two who serve on the Amherst and Amherst Regional boards, Catherine A. Sanderson, who has been blogging since 2008 the year she was elected, and Richard B. Hood, who was elected in March.
William C. Newman, director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts Western Massachusetts office, and Thomas Lesser, cooperating attorney, had written to Pepyne expressing concerns about limiting open discussion.
“The analysis necessarily must begin with the premise that the Web sites and blogging at issue are constitutionally protected political speech deserving the highest level of legal protection,” their letter states. Newman had also pointed out that the responsibility of jurisdiction was soon changing “and your office may well feel that providing an advisory opinion at this time is not appropriate.”