Todd Wallack v. Massachusetts District Attorneys Association (SPR 20170657)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords May 25, 2017 SPR17/657 Jennifer Franco, Esq. Records Access Officer Massachusetts District Attorneys Association One Bulfinch Place, Suite 202 Boston, MA 02114 Dear Attorney Franco: I have received the petition of Todd Wallack of The Boston Globe appealing the response of the Massachusetts District Attorneys Association (MDAA) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § lOA; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Mr. Wallack requested "minutes and agendas for all the MDAA meetings since January 1, 2015." In a response dated April 4, 2017, MDAA provided Mr. Wallack responsive records with portions redacted under Exemptions (d), (f), and (n) of the Public Records Law as well as the work product doctrine and the attorney client privilege. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(d), (f), (n). Previous appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR 17 / 4 73 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (April 19, 2017). I closed SPRl 7/473 with the proviso that MDAA provides Mr. Wallack with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with the order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations. In a response dated May 4, 2017 the MDAA provided a supplemental response regarding the applicability of exemptions to the redacted information. Mr. Wallack appealed and SPRl 7 /657 was opened as a result. Current appeal I understand Mr. Wallack has submitted an Open Meeting Law complaint to the Division of Open Government (Division) within the Office of the Attorney General (AGO) regarding this matter. Please be advised that the interpretation of the Open Meeting Law falls within the authority of the AGO and not this office. See G. L. c. 30A, § 23. One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832• Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre• pre@sec.state.ma.us

Jennifer Franco, Esq. SPRl 7/657 Page 2 May 25, 2017 Therefore, I find it is necessary to first obtain an opinion from the AGO as to whether any provision of the Open Meeting Law is implicated in this matter. I will consider this appeal closed pending the AGO's review. If appropriate, I will opine on this matter upon completion of the AGO's review. Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Todd Wallack Jonathan Sclarsic, Esq.