Andrew Spearing v. Cambridge, City of - Office of the City Clerk (SPR 20192349)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division

Rebecca S, Murray Supervisor of Records

December 5, 2019 SPR19/2349

Seah Levy

Public Records Access Officer

City of Cambridge

Office of the City Clerk

795 Massachusetts Avenue

Cambridge, MA 02139

Dear Ms, Levy:

I have received the petition of Andrew Spearing appealing the response of the City of Cambridge Office of the City Solicitor (City) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, §10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, on October 28, 2019, Mr. Spearing requested the following records:

“1, A list of all RESIDENTIAL properties in town that have delinquent water billing accounts. For each record, please indicate at least: a. The owner’s full name b. Property address c. Amount of money owed. 2. A separate list of all RESIDENTIAL properties whose water meters show ZERO consumption for the last THREE MONTHS OR MORE. For each record, please indicate at least: a. The owner’s full name b. Property address . c. Months with zero consumption (or at least date of last consumption), 3. Ifthe town shuts off water for delinquent payments and tracks those shutoffs, please include a list of all payment-related, residential water shutoffs for the last 3 months.”

_ Mr. Spearing stated that he preferred the records provided in an Excel format. The City responded on November 12, 2019, denying access to responsive records of part 2 of the request. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Mr. Spearing petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR19/2349, was opened as a result. While this appeal was pending, the City provided a supplemental response dated December 4, 2019.

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

Seah Levy SPR19/2349 Page 2 December 5, 2019

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, § 10A(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, § 10(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.

The City’s November 12" response

In its November 12'" response the City responded by producing “a document ... responsive to part | of [the] request, [stated] that [it] [had] no responsive records to part 3 of [the] request and cited Exemption (n) under G.L. c. 4, §7 (26) [to] [withhold] records [responsive] to part 2 of the request.”

Conclusion I find that in light of the City’s December 4" supplemental response I will consider this | administrative appeal closed. Mr. Spearing may appeal the substantive nature of the City’s December 4" response within 90 days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). ‘Sincerely,

Rebecca S. Murray ’

Supervisor of Records ce: Andrew Spearing