response to Amended Open Meeting Law Complaint of Hasson Rashid

February 22, 2016 Amy Nable, Assistant Attorney General Director of Division of Open Government Office of the Attorney General One Ashburton Place Boston, MA 02108 Re: Action taken by Cambridge City Council on Amended Open Meeting Law complaint of Hasson Rashid dated January 28, 2016 Dear Ms. Nable: On behalf of the Cambridge City Council, I am writing to advise you pursuant to 940 CMR 29.05(5) of the action taken by the City Council on the Amended Open Meeting Law Complaint of Hasson Rashid. A copy of Mr. Rashid’s amended complaint (which includes the original complaint) dated January 28, 2016 (the “Amended Complaint”) is attached. In his Amended Complaint, Mr. Rashid essentially repeats the allegations in his original Complaint dated January 8, 2016 and adds that, in addition to all the other City Councilors, he would like to direct his Amended Complaint against one new City Councilor, Jan Devereux because she voted in favor of responding to Mr. Rashid’s original Complaint with the letter dated January 26, 2016 that was unanimously approved by the City Council. He also states in his Amended Complaint that he would like to add the City Solicitor, the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority, and Boston Properties as “co-conspirators.” The City Council’s response to the original complaint dated January 25, 2016 is also attached, and is incorporated in this response. The Amended Complaint makes no new relevant factual allegations. There are no factual assertions to support Mr. Rashid’s claim that there was an Open Meeting Law violation by the City Solicitor, Cambridge Redevelopment Authority or Boston Properties. It is clear that Mr. Rashid disagrees with a policy decision made by the City Council concerning the minimum percentage of housing that would be available within a proposed housing development for homeownership. However, the request by the City Council for the percentage of homeownership units, as well as the developer’s agreement to the percentage requested, were both discussed at an open session of a City Council meeting attended by Mr. Rashid on December 21, 2015. The only thing that occurred outside the open meeting was that certain staff members whom themselves do not constitute a quorum of any public body (the City Solicitor, staff to the Cambridge Redevelopment Authority, and a representative of the developer Boston Properties) reduced the agreement made publicly to writing. That writing was then brought back to the City Council, made available to the public, and then voted on by the City Council in open session.

2 As stated previously, the Mayor and City Council deny that these actions constitute an Open Meeting Law violation. As required by 940 CMR 29.05(5), the City Council reviewed the allegations of the Amended Complaint within the extended time allowed by the Division of Open Government (i.e. before February 26, 2016). At its meeting of February 22, 2016, the City Council voted to adopt this letter as its response and resolution. Mr. Rashid is being informed of the City Council’s action by copy of this letter. Very truly yours, Donna P. Lopez City Clerk cc. Hasson Rashid P.O. Box 382313 Cambridge, MA 02139