David A. Marsocci v. Pembroke, Town of - Town Clerk (SPR 20191126)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords June 13, 2019 SPR19/1126 Denise M. Marshall Legal Assistant KP I LAW Town of Pembroke 101 Arch Street, 12th Floor Boston, MA 02110 Dear Ms. Marshall: I have received your petition on behalf of the Town of Pembroke (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. Specifically, on May 20, 2019, Attorney David A. Marsocci requested ten categories ofrecords, related to complaints the Town may have for roadway conditions and maintenance. Petitions/or 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. 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

Denise M. Marshall SPR19/1126 Page2 June 13, 2019 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 the Town's petition dated June 6, 2019, the Town requests "that it be granted an additional thirty business days to fully respond." The Town asserts the "requests are substantively overbroad, with Items 8 and 10 being temporally overbroad. Due to the broad reach of these requests, there are potentially thousands of pages of documents that the Town will have to search simply to locate responsive records." The Town explains "with respect to Items 5, 6, and 7, the Town's Highway Foreman will be required to search, segregate, .and redact four months of work orders related to every public way in the Town ... [t]he Foreman must search through four months of electronic communications as well as paper records, which are maintained at an off-site location, taking the Foreman away from his normal workplace and significant responsibilities to the public for the hours necessary to search and review potentially responsive records." Further, the Town explains the "Director and Principal Clerk in the Town Manager's office will have to review communications from their respective offices to catch any communications not otherwise found in the Foreman's search." The Town indicates "[w]ith respect to Item 8 the Town Manager's Principal Clerk must search through more than three years of e-mails to extract communications between the Town and Trident ... [i]n addition to the temporal breadth, the Town will encounter difficulty assessing archived records of two former employees of the Board of Selectman's office." The Town explains "[g]iven these records will pertain to insurance claims, the Town will have to redact credit card information and possibly bank account information from any responsive records found." I find that in light of the capacity and normal business hours of the Town, and the need to search for, collect and redact the requested records, the Town has established good cause to permit an extension of time of 30 business days. G. L. c. 66 § IO(c)(i)-(iv).

Denise M. Marshall SPR19/1126 Page 3 June 13, 2019 Conclusion For the reasons discussed above, the Town 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. The requestor may appeal the substantive nature of the Town's response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Additionally, the requestor may seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the superior court under G. L. c. 66, § IOA(c). Sincerely, ~ Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: David Marsocci, Esq.