Jose Cruz v. Holyoke, City of - City Clerk (SPR 20180672)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords May 23, 2018 SPRlS/672 Brenna McGee City of Holyoke - City Clerk 536 Dwight Street, Room 2 Holyoke, MA O1 040 Dear Ms. McGee: I have received the petition of Jose Cruz appealing the response of the City of Holyoke (City) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 1O A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1 ). Specifically, on April 19, 2018, Mr. Cruz requested "a list of all employees along with a photo I.D. of each who worked for the Parks and Recreation Department during the summer of 1985 and the summer of 1986." The City provided a response on April 20, 2018 indicating it does possess responsive records. After receiving the City's response, Mr. Cruz narrowed his request and requested "a list of all males [sic] employees of the Parks and Recreation Department who worked during the summer of 1985 and the summer of 1986" including their photo ID. Unsatisfied with the City's response, Mr. Cruz petitioned this office and this appeal, SPRl 8/672, was opened as a result. The 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, § 1O A( 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, § lO(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. 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

Brenna McGee SPR18/672 Page 2 May 23, 2018 If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § lO(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. The City's April 20th response In its April 20, 2018 response, the City indicated that it would require "additional time beyond the 10 business days allotted under the law in order to respond to this request." The City explains that due to the magnitude or difficulty of the request, the fact that such records are not readily available to locate and segregate, and because its personnel Department is currently transitioning staff and responsibilities, it may not be able to provide the records within the ten business days but would do so by May 24, 2018, which is twenty-five business days following the initial receipt of Mr. Cruz's request. Further, the City indicated that it "does not have custody of personnel records for employees terminated prior to January 1, 1998. See Municipal Retention, No. 01.110 (requiring municipalities to retain custody of personnel files for a period of twenty years after termination)." Although the City claims the Municipal Records Retention Schedule, specifically, series 01.110, requires the City to retain personnel files for a period of twenty years after termination of employment, it is unclear how the categories of information requested constitute information that will be found in a personnel file such that it would fall within the retention provision. Additionally, based on the City's response it is unclear whether any responsive employee list prior to 1998 exists. The City must clarify these matters. I understand a Public Records Division staff attorney contacted your office about this appeal. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Mr. Cruz with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within ten business days. A copy of any such 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: Jose Cruz