← Back to Search
Promotions Only v. Pittsfield, City of - City Clerk (SPR 20201535)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to respond · Filed 09-01-2020
ClosedAppealPetitioner Won
SPR 20201535 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Promotions Only concerning records held by Pittsfield, City of - City Clerk, opened 09-01-2020. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to respond.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20201535
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Promotions Only
- Custodian
- Pittsfield, City of - City Clerk
- Date Opened
- 09-01-2020
- Date Closed
- 09-10-2020
- Date Request Submitted
- 08-14-2020
- Response Provided Date
- 09-10-2020
- Processing Fees Charged
- 0.00
- Petitions Regarding Fees
- No
- Time to Comply
- NA
- Went to Court
- No
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records September 10, 2020 SPR20/1535 Michelle Benjamin City Clerk City Clerk’s Office 70 Allen Street Pittsfield, MA 01201 Dear Michelle Benjamin: I have received the petition of “Promotions Only” appealing the nonresponse of the City of Pittsfield (City) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, on August 14, 2020, Promotions Only requested “a copy of the list of companies, along with monetary contribution values, that received grind from the city as part of an Covid business continuation program.” 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, § l0A(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 theNorfolk 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. Subsequent to the intervention by a staff member of the Public Records Division, I learned that the City provided a response. In an email to this office dated September 10, 2020, the City states, “[p]lease be advised that a response was sent out to [Promotions Only] today with the information we believe he requested. If he needs additional information we respond.” 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 SPR20/1535 Michelle Benjamin Page 2 September 10, 2020 Conclusion In light of the City’s September 10th letter, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. Promotions Only may appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Promotions Only