Mavro Flanders, Noreen v. Martha's Vineyard Airport (SPR 20150606)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Shawn A. Williams Supervisor ofR ecords December 7, 2015 SPRlS/606 Mr. Sean C. Flynn, C.M. Airport Manager 71 Airport Road Vineyard Haven, MA 02568 Dear Mr. Flynn: I have received the petition of Noreen Mavro-Flanders, the Dukes County Treasurer, appealing the response ofthe Martha's Vineyard Airport (Airport) to her request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § 10(b); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2). Specifically, onMarch26, 2015, Ms. Mavro-Flanders requested completely detailed copies of January and February 2015 legal invoices regarding "County Litigation" and "NRG Energy Inc." for payment on Warrants 15-65 and 15-73. In your April2, 2015 response you stated that "the Airport does not currently have in its records the documents that you requested in a form that can be released. Working with the law firm the records are in the process of being appropriately redacted and will be forwarded when we have them." The basis of Ms. Mavro-Flanders' appeal is that the response was untimely, and that she received invoices that were fully redacted of detail within the content of the invoices. Your initial April2, 2015 response was an acknowledgment of Ms. Mavro-Flanders request, and in an April27, 2015 email (32 days after the request) you informed Ms. Mavro-Flanders that the documents will be provided when they are available. On June 17, 2015, the Airport provided the records (83 days after the request). 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. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b); 950 C.M.R. 32.05. The response may be an offer to provide records, a fee estimate for provision of the records, or a denial. The Airport is advised to provide responses within this required timeframe in the future. OneAshburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 · (617) 727-2832 ·Fax (617) 727-5914 www.sec.state.ma. us/pre

Mr. Sean C. Flynn, C.M. SPR15/606 Page Two December 7, 2015 The June 17 cover letter that accompanied the invoices states that the responsive records "have been redacted in order to protect material subject to attorney client privilege or attorney protected work product." It is the burden of the records custodian to demonstrate the application of an exemption in order to withhold a requested record. G. L. c. 66, § 1 0( c); see also District Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507,511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). The June 17 response fails to satisfy this burden. Accordingly, whereas the Airport has not overcome the presumption that the requested records are public, the Airport is hereby ordered, within ten (10) days of this order, to provide Ms. Mavro-Flanders with un-redacted invoices. If the Airport maintains that any portion of the responsive records are exempt from disclosure under the attorney client privilege it must, within ten (1 0) days provide to Ms. Mavro-Flanders a written explanation, with specificity, how the attorney client privilege applies to withhold the detailed content within each record. To meet the specificity requirement a custodian must not only cite an exemption, but must also state why the exemption applies to the withheld or redacted portion of the responsive record. A copy of any such response must be provided to this office. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of this response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. If there are any fees associated with this response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(2) (where cost of complying with a request for public records is expected to exceed ten dollars ($10.00), custodian of records shall provide written good faith estimate). Once the fees are paid, ou must provide the responsive records. urs, cc: Ms. Noreen Mavro-Flanders