Wallack, Todd v. Boston, City of - Transportation Department (SPR 20140144)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Shawn A. Williams Supervisor ofR ecords May 9, 2014 SPR14/144 Ms. Tracey Ganiatsos Manager Department of Transportation Public Information Office City of Boston One City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201 Dear Ms. Ganiatsos: I have received a petition from Todd Wallack of The Boston Globe appealing the March 5, 2014 response by the City ofBoston Department of Transportation (City) to his December 9, 2013 request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 1O (b) (authority of Supervisor of Public Records to resolve public records appeals); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(6) (appeals process). Specifically, Mr. Wallack requested a copy of the City's electronic index or list of resident parking permits, including the recipient's name, address, neighborhood, issue date, and other public information in the database. Under the Public Records Law and the Access Regulations (Regulations) all requests for public records must be met with a response within ten (10) days of the request. On February 14, 2014, sixty-seven (67) days after Mr. Wallack sent his request to the City, you responded that you would instruct the Resident Parking Program staff to review the request. A record custodian has a duty to comply with a public records request as soon as is practicable, without unreasonable delay, and always within ten (10) calendar days. G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); 950 C.M.R. 32.05(2).The ten-day provision is a maximum, rather than a minimum time frame for complying with a public records request. Boston Globe Newspaper Company v. Commissioner of Education, 439 Mass. 124 (2003). On March 4, 2014, Mr. Wallack emailed a member of my staff, stating that the City verbally denied his request. It is my understanding that you informed Mr. Wallack that the City OneAshburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 · (617) 727-2832 ·Fax (617) 727-5914 www.sec.state.ma. us/ pre

Ms. Tracey Ganiatsos SPR14/144 Page Two May 9, 2014 believes that the names and addresses of the recipients of the parking pennits is confidential infom1ation protected by the Drivers Privacy Protection Act See 18 U.S.C. § 2721 (D.P.P.A.). The City did not provide Mr. Wallack with any written response. After the intervention of this office, on March 5, 2014, you sent a written response to Mr. Wallack via email, and for a second time you cited the D.P.P.A. as means of denying the request. You informed Mr. Wallack that the City is willing to supply him with an electronic copy of the Resident Parking Program database that will include the vehicle registration number, the zip code and the resident parking permit number. Mr. Wallack appealed your written response to this office. On April 17, 2014, an attomey on my staff telephoned you to give you a final opportunity to provide specific information to support the City's exemption claim ofD.P.P.A. To date, no one from the City has contacted this office to provide more detailed information. Therefore, I find that the City has not met its burden under the Public Records Law. Given that the ability to inspect the records of govemment is fundamental to our democracy, there is a presumption that all govemmental records are public records. Disclosure of govemmental records is favored by the presumption that the record sought is public. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); 950 C.M.R. 32.08(4). See The Harvard Crimson, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College; Globe Newspaper Co. v. Boston Retirement Bd., 388 Mass. 427, 436 (1983). In order to withhold a record requested pursuant to the Public Records Law, the record custodian is charged with the duty of proving with specificity how a particular exemption applies to each individual record requested. (emphasis added). See G.L. c. 66, § 10( c); see also District Attomey for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian must offer specific proof that the records sought are of a type to which an exemption applies). Accordingly, I find that the City has failed to meet its burden and has not overcome the presumption that the responsive records are public records. You are hereby ordered to provide Mr. Wallack with the responsive records within ten (10) days. Altematively, you must provide this office and Mr. Wallack with a detailed, written response to support your claim that the D.P.P.A. allows the City to withhold the names and addresses of the parking permit recipients. Further, if the City is planning to charge Mr. Wallack for the cost of providing him with the records, he must receive a detailed written, good faith estimate. See 950 C.M.R. 32.00 (costs

Ms. Tracey Ganiatsos SPR14/144 Page Three May 9, 2014 for copies of records). Once Mr. Wallack provides the estimate funds, he must be provided with the records. Failure to comply with this determination may result in Mr. Wallack filing a complaint in Superior Court for enforcement. This administrative appeal is closed. Supervisor of Records cc: Mr. Todd Wallack