Mark Young v. Framingham, City of - Mayor's Office (SPR 20180669)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts \Villiam Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords May 16, 2018 SPR18/669 Mike Tusino Records Access Officer City of Framingham 150 Concord Street Framingham, MA 01702 Dear Mr. Tusino: I have received your petition on behalf of the City of Framingham (City) seeking an extension of time to furnish copies of a requested record, or any portion thereof. G. L. c. 66, § lO(c); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). As required by law, the City furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor. G. L. c. 66, § lO(c). Specifically, on April 25, 2018 Mark Young requested "any and all purchasing records from 2017-12-26 (yyyy-mm-dd) to current." 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 (vi) the public interest served by expeditious disclosure. G. L. c. 66 § lO(c). 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

Mike Tusino SPR18/669 Page2 May 16, 2018 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 the petition, you indicate the City "requests an extension of time of 20 business days (beyond the 10 business days permissible for a response at the local level) to comply with the following public records request submitted by Mark Young." The City explains "[m]ost of the information that Mr. Young is requesting is not maintained in any central database by the City, so each municipal department would need to take part in this response by making a coordinated effort to compile the majority of detailed information being requested." They further explain "the purchase module is used to encumber all expenditure activity. As a result, the following information would be redacted as privileged information, under exemption ( c) or exemption (o ). " I find that in light of the scope of the requests, the capacity of the City to produce records, and redactions to the records for exempt information, the City has established good cause to permit an extension of time to complete the request. Conclusion For the reasons discussed above, the City is granted an extension of time to provide a response to Mr. Young. The response must be provided by June 7, 2018, in a manner consistent with the Public Records Law, its Access Regulations. Mr. Young may appeal the substantive nature of the City's response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Mr. Young may seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the superior court under G. L. c. 66 § lOA(c). Sincerely, ~~ Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Todd Wallack