David Sullivan v. Revere, City of - Office of the City Clerk (SPR 20170988)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords August 2, 2017 SPR17/988 Ashley E. Melnik City Clerk City of Revere 281 Broadway Revere, MA 02151 Dear Ms. Melnik: I have received the petition of David A. Sullivan, Esq. appealing the response of the City of Revere (City) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § lOA; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, on February 15, 2017, Attorney Sullivan's client requested all emails and text messages sent or received by an identified individual, to and from multiple others, spanning from January 1, 2016 to May 1, 2016. The City's MIS Department generated 52,926 emails responsive to the request and hired a "legal temp" to assist with the review process. Attorney Sullivan was provided with 11,947 un redacted emails on July 14, 2017 and an additional14,414 un-redacted emails on July 25, 2017. On July 19, 201 7 the City provided Attorney Sullivan with a further response and an additional estimate for $3,400.00 to cover the production of the balance of the responsive records. Attorney Sullivan appealed and SPR17 /988 was opened as a result. Petition for extension of time Please note the City previously submitted a petition for an extension of time to produce responsive records. On July 26, 2017, in light of the volume of responsive records and the capacity of the City to produce the records, I found that the City established good cause to permit an extension oftime under G. L. c. 66, § lO(c)(i)-(iv). I granted the City an extension of fifteen business days from the date of the July 26th determination on the petition. See SPR17/ 984 Determination of the Supervisor (July 26, 2017). Fees An RAO may not charge a fee unless the RAO provides a written response in compliance with G. L. c. 66, § lO(b) within ten business days following receipt of the request. G. L. c. 66, § lO(e). The City may not be permitted to charge fees associated with the February 15th request if 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

Ashley E. Melnik SPR17/988 Page 2 August 2, 2017 the City did not provide a response to this request in compliance with this provision of the law. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(e); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(2)(c). The written response shall be made via first class or electronic mail and shall: (i) confirm receipt of the request; (ii) identify any public records or categories of public records sought that are not within the possession, custody, or control of the agency or municipality that the records access officer serves; (iii) identify the agency or municipality that may be in possession, custody or control of the public record sought, if known; (iv) identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based, provided that nothing in the written response shall limit an agency's or municipality's ability to redact or withhold information in accordance with state or federal law; (v) identify any public records, categories of records, or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to produce, and provide a detailed statement describing why the magnitude or difficulty of the request unduly burdens the other responsibilities of the agency or municipality and therefore requires additional time to produce the public records sought; (vi) identify a reasonable timeframe in which the agency or municipality shall produce the public records sought; provided, that for an agency, the timeframe shall not exceed 15 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records and for a municipality the timeframe shall not exceed 25 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records; and provided further, that the requestor may voluntarily agree to a response date beyond the timeframes set forth herein; (vii) suggest a reasonable modification of the scope of the request or offer to assist the requestor to modify the scope of the request if doing so would enable the agency or municipality to produce records sought more efficiently and affordably; (viii) include an itemized, good faith estimate of any fees that may be charged to produce the records; and (ix) include a statement informing the requestor of the right of appeal to the supervisor of records under subsection (a) of section 1O A and the rightto seek judicial review of an unfavorable decision by commencing a civil action in the superior court under subsection (c) of section 1O A. G.L. c. 66, § 10(b). It is unclear whether the City complied with G. L. c. 66, § 10 ( e) and 950 C.M.R 32.06(2)(c). Therefore, I find the City must demonstrate whether it responded to the February 15th request within ten business days following receipt of the request in compliance with G. L. c. 66, § lO(e) and 950 C.M.R 32.06(2)(c).

Ashley E. Melnik SPR17/988 Page 3 August 2, 201 7 Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Attorney Sullivan with a response prepared in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, its Access Regulations and this order within ten days. A copy of the 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. Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: David A. Sullivan, Esq.