Karen A. Adamski v. Westhampton, Town of - Office of the Town Clerk (SPR 20171766)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records January 5, 2018 SPR17/1766 Cheryl Provost Administrative Assistant Town of Westhampton Town Hall, 1 South Road Westhampton, MA 01027 Dear Ms. Provost: I have received your petition on behalf of the Town of Westhampton (Town) seeking an extension of time to furnish copies of a requested record, or any portion thereof. G. L. c. 66, § lO(c). As required by law, the Town furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor. Id. In a request received on December 12, 2017, Karen A. Adamski, Esq. requested "all of the records, from the past 30 years, in chronological order, related to JAWS Auto Recycling, the business operations of Kenneth and Denise Scehorczyk, the property known as 'O' Main Road in Westhampton, and any and all communications to or from my clients John Marchand and Dean Marchand as well as to or from the decedent Albert Marchand" contained within the files of the Planning Department, Zoning Board of Appeals, Board of Health, and Building Department. Petitions for an extension of time Under the Public Records Law, upon a showing of good cause, the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) may grant a single extension to an agency not to exceed 20 business days and a single extension to a municipality not to exceed 30 business days. In determining whether there has been a showing of good cause, the Supervisor shall consider, but shall not be limited to considering: (i) the need to search for, collect, segregate or examine records; (ii) the scope of redaction required to prevent unlawful disclosure; (iii) the capacity or the normal business hours of operation of the agency or municipality to produce the request without the extension; (iv) efforts undertaken by the agency or municipality in fulfilling the current request and previous requests; (v ) whether the request, either individually or as part of a series of requests from the same requestor, is frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality; and 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

Cheryl Provost SPRl 7/1766 Page 2 January 5, 2018 (vi) the public interest served by expeditious disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § lO(c). If the Supervisor determines that the request is part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass, and the requests are not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, the Supervisor may grant a longer extension or relieve the agency or municipality of its obligation to provide copies of the records sought. Id. The filing of a petition does not affect the requirement that a Records Access Officer (RAO) shall provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 36.06(4)(b). Current petition In its petition dated December 27, 2017 you explain the Town is seeking additional time beyond January 19, 2018, which is the twenty-fifth business day from the Town's receipt of the request, to produce responsive records. See G. L. c. 66, § lO(b)(vi) (a municipality may provide a timeframe not to exceed 25 business days to produce responsive records). You indicate that "[t]he wide scope and extent of the search for records on this subject will require additional time due to the extended span of time, the multiple departments involved, and the volume ofrecords that require review." You also provide information regarding the volume of responsive records from the past thirty years, the ability of the Town to fulfill the request within normal business hours, and the need to locate and scan older paper files. You note that "[t]he Town Clerk and I will develop a strategy to work together and complete this request by March 1, 2018." The Town also provided a written response to Attorney Adamski on December 2ih in which it seeks her voluntary assent to additional time beyond January 19th to produce records. This response also included a fee estimate and a suggestion of a modification of the scope of the request in order to reduce time and cost for the production of records. In your petition to this office you assert the Town is "requesting an extension to you in the event a voluntary extension is not granted by the requestor." Conclusion I find that in light of the Town's December 27th response to Attorney Adamski it is unnecessary to opine on the Town's petition at this time. See G.L. c. 66, § 1 O(b)(a municipality must provide a written response within ten business days which may, where applicable, suggest a reasonable modification of the scope of the request, provide a good faith fee estimate, or request a voluntary assent to be able to produce records beyond 25 business days from receipt of the request).

Cheryl Provost SPRl 7/1766 Page 3 January 5, 2018 To the best of my knowledge Attorney Adamski has yet to respond to the fee estimate amount, suggestion to modify the scope of the request, or the request for voluntary assent to an extension of time. Upon clarification from Attorney Adamski regarding these matters, the Town may seek another extension of time to produce records. It should also be noted that a fee shall not be assessed for time spent segregating or redacting records unless such segregation or redaction is required by law or approved by the Supervisor of Records under a petition under G. L. c. 66, § lO(d)(iv). See G. L. c. 66, § lO(d)(iii); 950 CMR 32.06(4). Attorney Adamski may appeal the substantive nature of the December 2ih response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, ~~ Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Karen A. Adamski, Esq.