ATHOS V. LONGO, trustee, vs. BOARD OF APPEALS OF MALDEN.

ELAINE ROBINSON & others vs. PLANNING BOARD OF HINGHAM.

6 Mass. App. Ct. 835

January 31, 1978

We need not consider whether the judge was correct in

Page 836

ruling that the meeting of the defendant board was an "emergency" meeting as defined by G. L. c. 39, Section 23A (as appearing in St. 1976, c. 397, Section 5), and as used in Section 23B (as appearing in St. 1976, c. 397, Section 6) because the judge made an alternative ruling, as a matter of discretion, declining to invalidate the questioned action of the board. Section 23B, as so appearing, provides, among other things, that a court "may invalidate any action taken at any meeting at which any provision of this section has been violated . . . ." We decline to accept the plaintiffs' suggestion that we treat the auxiliary verb "may" as meaning "shall," as to do so would do violence to the purposes for which Section 23B was enacted. See Abbene v. Election Commrs. of Revere, 348 Mass. 247 , 250-251 (1964). The judge had discretion to invalidate or not (Nantucket Land Council, Inc. v. Planning Bd. of Nantucket, 5 Mass. App. Ct. 206 , 213 [1977]; Kelley v. Planning Bd of Dennis, ante 24, 26-27 [1978]), and nothing in the record indicates any abuse of that discretion.

Judgment affirmed.