Mass. Gen. Laws » Part I Title III Chapter 30A
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 30A, § 23 (2026)

Enforcement of open meeting law; complaints; hearing; civil action

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 23. (a) Subject to appropriation, the attorney general shall interpret and enforce the open meeting law.

(b) At least 30 days prior to the filing of a complaint with the attorney general, the complainant shall file a written complaint with the public body, setting forth the circumstances which constitute the alleged violation and giving the body an opportunity to remedy the alleged violation; provided, however, that such complaint shall be filed within 30 days of the date of the alleged violation. The public body shall, within 14 business days of receipt of a complaint, send a copy of the complaint to the attorney general and notify the attorney general of any remedial action taken. Any remedial action taken by the public body in response to a complaint under this subsection shall not be admissible as evidence against the public body that a violation occurred in any later administrative or judicial proceeding relating to such alleged violation. The attorney general may authorize an extension of time to the public body for the purpose of taking remedial action upon the written request of the public body and a showing of good cause to grant the extension.

(c) Upon the receipt of a complaint by any person, the attorney general shall determine, in a timely manner, whether there has been a violation of the open meeting law. The attorney general may, and before imposing any civil penalty on a public body shall, hold a hearing on any such complaint. Following a determination that a violation has occurred, the attorney general shall determine whether the public body, 1 or more of the members, or both, are responsible and whether the violation was intentional or unintentional. Upon the finding of a violation, the attorney general may issue an order to:

(1) compel immediate and future compliance with the open meeting law;

(2) compel attendance at a training session authorized by the attorney general;

(3) nullify in whole or in part any action taken at the meeting;

(4) impose a civil penalty upon the public body of not more than $1,000 for each intentional violation;

(5) reinstate an employee without loss of compensation, seniority, tenure or other benefits;

(6) compel that minutes, records or other materials be made public; or

(7) prescribe other appropriate action.

(d) A public body or any member of a body aggrieved by any order issued pursuant to this section may, notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, obtain judicial review of the order only through an action in superior court seeking relief in the nature of certiorari; provided, however, that notwithstanding section 4 of chapter 249, any such action shall be commenced in superior court within 21 days of receipt of the order. Any order issued under this section shall be stayed pending judicial review; provided, however, that if the order nullifies an action of the public body, the body shall not implement such action pending judicial review.

(e) If any public body or member thereof shall fail to comply with the requirements set forth in any order issued by the attorney general, or shall fail to pay any civil penalty imposed within 21 days of the date of issuance of such order or within 30 days following the decision of the superior court if judicial review of such order has been timely sought, the attorney general may file an action to compel compliance. Such action shall be filed in Suffolk superior court with respect to state public bodies and, with respect to all other public bodies, in the superior court in any county in which the public body acts or meets. If such body or member has not timely sought judicial review of the order, such order shall not be open to review in an action to compel compliance.

(f) As an alternative to the procedure in subsection (b), the attorney general or 3 or more registered voters may initiate a civil action to enforce the open meeting law.

Any action under this subsection shall be filed in Suffolk superior court with respect to state public bodies and, with respect to all other public bodies, in the superior court in any county in which the public body acts or meets.

In any action filed pursuant to this subsection, in addition to all other remedies available to the superior court, in law or in equity, the court shall have all of the remedies set forth in subsection (c).

In any action filed under this subsection, the order of notice on the complaint shall be returnable not later than 10 days after the filing and the complaint shall be heard and determined on the return day or on such day as the court shall fix, having regard to the speediest possible determination of the cause consistent with the rights of the parties; provided, however, that orders may be issued at any time on or after the filing of the complaint without notice when such order is necessary to fulfill the purposes of the open meeting law. In the hearing of any action under this subsection, the burden shall be on the respondent to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the action complained of in such complaint was in accordance with and authorized by the open meeting law; provided, however, that no civil penalty may be imposed on an individual absent proof that the action complained of violated the open meeting law.

(g) It shall be a defense to the imposition of a penalty that the public body, after full disclosure, acted in good faith compliance with the advice of the public body's legal counsel.

(h) Payment of civil penalties under this section paid to or received by the attorney general shall be paid into the general fund of the commonwealth.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2013–2025 · leading case: Boelter v. Bd. of Selectmen of Wayland, 93 N.E.3d 1163 (Mass. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Boelter v. Bd. of Selectmen of Wayland, 93 N.E.3d 1163 (Mass. 2018). · cites it 5× “As judicial review of an Attorney General's determination in such matters is available only to an aggrieved public body or member thereof, see G. L. c. 30A, § 23 ( d ), Harris did not appeal from the decision.”
City of Revere v. Massachusetts Gaming Comm'n, 71 N.E.3d 457 (Mass. 2017). · cites it 2× “*595 Finally, in the second amended complaint only, the individual plaintiffs seek relief under the open meeting law, G. L. c. 30A, § 23 (count V). Essentially, count V alleges that a quorum of the commission engaged in deliberations that should have taken place in a public…”
O'Rourke v. Hampshire Council of Governments, 121 F. Supp. 3d 264 (D. Mass. 2015). · cites it 2× “Opp’n 13) See Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 30A § 23(f). In Plaintiffs opposition memorandum, however, he seems to indicate that the determination by the Attorney General should serve only to bolster his argument that his Procedural Due Process rights were violated, as opposed to serving…”
Bd. of Selectmen of W. Bridgewater v. Attorney Gen., 103 N.E.3d 1237 (Mass. App. Ct. 2018). · cites it 2× “The board then commenced this action pursuant to G. L. c. 30A, § 23( d ), seeking certiorari review under G.”
Rufo v. Wash. Oak Square Ltd., 94 N.E.3d 438 (Mass. App. Ct. 2017). · cites it 3× “G. L. c. 30A, § 23( c )(3), as amended by St.”
Shwachman v. Town of Hopedale (D. Mass. 2021). “The Complaint alleges, in Counts I through X, that the Defendants engaged in intentional and repeated violations of state laws that are designed to promote transparency, openness and honesty in municipal government, including serial violations of M.G.L. c. 30A, § 23 (the Open…”
Sousa v. Seekonk Sch. Comm. (D. Mass. 2023). “G.L. c. 30A § 23, which include filing a written complaint to the public body and allowing the body to remedy the alleged violation prior to filing a complaint with the attorney general, or alternatively, initiating a civil action by three or more registered voters.”
Susannah Kay & Another v. Town of Concord (Mass. App. Ct. 2025). “[10] See G. L. c. 30A, §§ 23 (f), 24 (e). By enacting a new open meeting law, the Legislature strengthened the privilege rather than making it "unmistakably clear" that it intended to divest towns "of a privilege as basic and important as the attorney-client privilege.”
Karen Boutet, Terra Friedrichs, & Jeremy Symonds v. Acton Bd. of Selectmen (Mass. Super. Ct. 2020). “…(6) compel that minutes, records or other materials be made public; or (7) prescribe other appropriate action." G.L. c. 30A, §23(c) and (f). -12-”
Collins v. Wayland Bd. of Selectmen, 31 Mass. L. Rptr. 189 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2013). “See G.L.c. 30A, §23(f). In exercising that discretion, the Court concludes that declaratory relief is an adequate remedy in this case.”
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 30A, § 23(c) — 1 case
Karen Boutet, Terra Friedrichs, & Jeremy Symonds v. Acton Bd. of Selectmen (Mass. Super. Ct. 2020). “…(6) compel that minutes, records or other materials be made public; or (7) prescribe other appropriate action." G.L. c. 30A, §23(c) and (f). -12-”
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 30A, § 23(f) — 2 cases
O'Rourke v. Hampshire Council of Governments, 121 F. Supp. 3d 264 (D. Mass. 2015). “Opp’n 13) See Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 30A § 23(f). In Plaintiffs opposition memorandum, however, he seems to indicate that the determination by the Attorney General should serve only to bolster his argument that his Procedural Due Process rights were violated, as opposed to serving…”
Collins v. Wayland Bd. of Selectmen, 31 Mass. L. Rptr. 189 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2013). “See G.L.c. 30A, §23(f). In exercising that discretion, the Court concludes that declaratory relief is an adequate remedy in this case.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.