Susan Petroni v. Framingham, City of (SPR 20201906)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records October 13, 2020 SPR20/1906 Todd Palmer Super RAO Mayor's Office Department City of Framingham 150 Concord St. Framingham, MA 01702 Dear Mr. Palmer: I have received your petition on behalf of the City of Framingham (City) requesting an extension of time to produce records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). As required by law, the City furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor. Id. On September 9, 2020, Susan Petroni, on behalf of SOURCE Media, requested “emails from ANY city email address to MEMA, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Mass DCR, Mass EOPS, and Mass DEP, or the Governor's office, and also the legislative delegation between August 1 and September 9.” On September 23, 2020, Ms. Petroni clarified “[w]e are looking for only emails related to COVID, coronavirus & the pandemic.” 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; 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

Todd Palmer SPR20/1906 Page 2 October 13, 2020 (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, § 10(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 its October 5, 2020, petition, the City requests “permission to take additional time to perform this where it is such a large time consuming ask.” The City indicates “[i]n querying our system for this request, it returned over 1500 emails, which our departments are trying to go through.” It is unclear why additional time is needed beyond the time allowed in G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi), which provides that a municipality may provide a timeframe not to exceed 25 business days after the initial request. Specifically, it is unclear what tasks are necessary to produce the responsive records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(c)(i)-(ii). Accordingly, I find the City has not demonstrated good cause for an extension of time. Conclusion In light of the above, the City’s petition for an extension of time cannot be granted at this time. Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Susan Petroni