Wayland Town Crier 7/7/10: Wayland attorney looking to AG to review Open Meeting Law incident. A Wayland attorney is hoping the state attorney general's office will review a 2009 incident in which he thinks town and state officials skirted the Open Meeting Law.

Wayland Town Crier 2/24/10: Resident files new complaint over School Committee evaluations. A plethora of redactions and a missing 2006 evaluation have spurred further controversy from the recent release of individual comments created for Superintendent Gary Burton’s performance evaluations from 2004 to 2009 by School Committee members. A complaint, filed with the Middlesex district attorney on Friday, requests a review of the redactions made to the evaluation comments of committee members. If it is determined the comments were "improperly suppressed," the information originally redacted may be restored. In addition, the filer of the complaint, Alan Reiss, asked for the release of School Committee member Jeff Dieffenbach’s 2006 evaluation comments, which "were not prepared at a meeting convened under the Open Meeting Law," according to the complaint.

Worcester Telegram 2/5/10: To Tell, or not to tell: Laws conflict on public disclosure of job reviews. A recent Supreme Judicial Court decision does little to resolve a long-running conflict between state laws that govern public meetings and public records, according to local officials and observers. The state’s highest court sided with the Middlesex district attorney’s office when it found the Wayland School Committee violated the Open Meeting Law by evaluating the school superintendent in executive, or nonpublic, session. The Open Meeting Law requires that discussion of a public employee’s professional competence be public; it does not apply to discussion of his or her reputation, character or health. But under public records law, written performance evaluations are exempt from disclosure, unless made public by the employee being evaluated. “Many of us are still confused as to how a board is to compile a confidential, nonpublic document (the evaluation) but discuss the same subject in an open meeting,” said Gregory B. Franks, Westboro’s town counsel.

Wayland Town Crier 1/20/10: Superintendent's office releases 2004 documents after court ruling. Former School Committee member Heather Pineault’s evaluation of Superintendent Gary Burton in 2004 takes a more critical view than what ended up in the final evaluation compiled by then-Chairman Jeff Dieffenbach, according to documents released by the superintendent’s office following a ruling by the state Supreme Judicial Court (SJC).

Metrowest Daily News 1/12/10: Wayland School Committee to release documents. The School Committee voted last night to release two documents at the center of a long legal dispute in accordance with a ruling by the state's highest court. The Supreme Judicial Court ruled on Dec. 31 that the school board violated the Open Meeting Law when then-chairman Jeff Dieffenbach requested, via private e-mail, that the four committee members give him their comments on the superintendent's job performance so that he could synthesize their comments into one draft. The School Committee voted unanimously to release the two documents. The public may request the two documents by writing a letter or e-mailing Superintendent Gary Burton, who will comply with each request within 10 days.

Wayland Town Crier 1/9/09: SJC decision could have far-reaching effects on public records. After a Supreme Judicial Court ruling found that the Wayland School Committee violated the Open Meeting Law during a 2004 superintendent evaluation, local officials are figuring out what the ruling means and whether it will be a moot point later this year.

Metrowest Daily News 1/5/09: Wayland School Committee delays court-ordered release of e-mails. Despite last week's landmark ruling by the Supreme Judicial Court which saying the School Committee must release two e-mails the court deemed violated the Open Meeting Law, the committee is biding its time in complying. Last night, the committee deferred discussion of the ruling until its meeting next Monday when Jeff Dieffenbach, who was away on business and is the only member of the current committee whose tenure dates to the time of the violation, can be present.