Matthew T. Durand v. Attleboro, City of - City Solicitor (SPR 20180858)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords June 20, 2018 SPRlS/858 Kevin S. Freytag, Esq. Murphy, Hesse, Toomey & Lehane, LLP 300 Crown Colony Drive Quincy, MA 02169 Dear Attorney Freytag: I have received your petition on behalf of the City of Attleboro (City) seeking an extension of time to furnish copies ofrequested records. 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), (d)(iv). On May 29, 2018, Matthew Durand submitted a request for seven categories ofrecords related to the "Health 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 (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 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

Kevin S. Freytag, Esq. SPR18/858 Page 2 June 20, 2018 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 requester within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 36.06(4 )(b ). Current petition In its May 13, 2018 petition the City is requesting "an extension of thirty (30) business days to respond to respond to Cumberland Farms' requests." The City indicates they need "additional time to respond to the Cumberland Farms' requests based on the number of documents that have been requested and the City's good faith estimate of the time it will take." The City explains "[t]he records sought ... are maintained by several different departments within the City" and "[e]ach of these departments has its own separate and unique records system that will need to be searched by individuals who are familiar with the department's records and records system." Further, "the requests do not include any time restrictions" and "the Health Department anticipates it will need to search its own records as far back as 1930s." The City also explains "[t]he documents sought by Cumberland Farms are not maintained by the City in a manner that is consistent with the manner in which Cumberland Farms has requested the documents" and "[a]s a result, it will take the City a considerable amount of time to respond." I find that in light of the broad scope of the request, the City has established good cause to permit an extension of time of 30 business days. G. L. c. 66 § lO(c)(i)-(iv). Conclusion For the reasons discussed above, the City is granted an extension of 30 business days to produce responsive records. The records must be provided consistent with the Public Records Law and its Access Regulations. To the extent possible, the City must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. The requestor may appeal the substantive nature of the City's response within ninety days. See'950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). This office encourages Matthew Durand and the City to continue to communicate to facilitate providing records more efficiently and affordably. See G. L. c. 66, §lO(b)(vii) (a municipality shall 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 municipality to produce records sought more efficiently and affordably). If there is an updated fee estimate, it must be in compliance with this determination, the Public Records Law, and its Access

Kevin S. Freytag, Esq. SPR18/858 Page 3 June 20, 2018 Regulations. Additionally, the requestor 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: Matthew Durand