← Back to Search
Mary Serreze v. Easthampton, City of - Office of the Mayor (SPR 20160014)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Public records appeal decision · Filed 01-06-2016
ClosedAppealDecision
SPR 20160014 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Mary Serreze concerning records held by Easthampton, City of - Office of the Mayor, opened 01-06-2016. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Public records appeal decision.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20160014
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Mary Serreze
- Date Opened
- 01-06-2016
- Date Closed
- 02-05-2016
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Shawn A. Williams Supervisor ofR ecords February 5, 2016 SPR16/014 The Honorable Karen Cadieux·· Mayor of the City of Easthampton Municipal Building 50 Payson A venue Easthampton, MA 01027 Dear Mayor Cadieux: I have received the petition of Mary Serreze an independent correspondent for Mass Live and The Springfield Republican appealing an initial response of the City of Easthampton Office of the Mayor (City) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § 10(b); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2). Specifically in a December 29, 2015 Ms. Serreze requested an unsigned copy of a proposed contract for the development ofthe website for the City. On December 29, 2015, you informed Ms. Serreze that the City would provide Ms. Serreze with the contract once it is finalized and signed. Ms. Serreze appealed. Subsequent to the opening of this appeal you contacted this office. During a telephone discussion on January 12, 2016 you informed an attorney on my staff that Ms. Serreze was provided with a signed copy of the responsive record. Failure to claim an exemption to withhold records The issue in this appeal relates to the City's failure to claim an exemption related to the denial of access to the draft agreement prior to its signing. If a custodian of records maintains that any portion of a responsive record is exempt from disclosure it must, within ten (1 0) days provide to the requester a written explanation, with specificity, how a particular exemption applies to 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. The City failed to claim any exemption with respect to Ms. Serreze's request. The City's response also failed to inform Ms. Serreze of the administrative remedy to a denial of access. A custodian must advise the person denied access of his or her remedies. 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). OneAshburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 · (617) 727-2832 ·Fax (617) 727-5914 www.sec.state.ma. us/pre Mayor Karen Cadieux SPR16/014 Page 2 February 5, 2016 Enclosed publication; training available To assist the City in responding to requests for public records I have enclosed a copy of our publication, A Guide to the Massachusetts Public Records Law. This document is also available on the Internet, free of charge, at http://www.sec.state.ma.us/pre/prepdf/guide.pdf. Attorneys on my staff are available during regular business hours to answer general questions regarding the Public Records Law. In addition, members of my staff will visit a records custodian in person to conduct training workshops on the Public Records Law upon request. Please contactmyofficedirectl~atthetelephGnenumber-pl"(:l¥i .1€fl-in-thi-s-d€t~rn±inatien-fm------------------- further information. cc: Ms. Mary Serreze Mr. Barry Small