← Back to Search
Russell Seelig v. Springfield, City of - Public Schools (SPR 20171377)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to respond · Filed 09-28-2017
ClosedAppealPetitioner Won
SPR 20171377 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Russell Seelig concerning records held by Springfield, City of - Public Schools, opened 09-28-2017. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to respond.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20171377
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Russell Seelig
- Date Opened
- 09-28-2017
- Date Closed
- 10-06-2017
- Date Request Submitted
- 09-12-2017
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords October 6, 2017 SPR17/1377 Anthony L. Wilson, Esq. City Clerk City of Springfield 36 Court Street Springfield, MA 01103 Dear Attorney Wilson: I have received the petition of Russell Seelig appealing the response of the City of Springfield (City) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § 1O A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Mr. Seelig requested documents that provide and decipher the code for billboard, cell tower and cell antennae parcels shown in the land information section of property record cards, including the description of the influence percentage and how those influences are determined. The City responded to his request, however, Mr. Seelig states the response did not fully address his request and he appealed to this office. Th.e Public Records Law The Public Records Law strongly favors disclosure by creating a presumption that all governmental records are public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A(d); 950 C.M.R. 32.03(4). "Public records" is broadly defined to include all documentary materials or data, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by any officer or employee of any town of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). 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, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). 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. If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 1O (b )(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. 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 Anthony I. Wilson, Esq. SPR17/1377 Page2 October 6, 2017 Determination The City provided Mr. Seelig a supplemental response on October 6, 2017, addressing all aspects of his request. I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. Mr. Seelig may appeal the substantive nature of the City's response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, ~ Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Russell Seelig