MA Public Records Search
← Back to Search

Colman Herman v. Attleboro, City of - City Clerk (SPR 20210128)

Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 02-16-2021

ClosedAppealPetitioner Won

SPR 20210128 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Colman Herman concerning records held by Attleboro, City of - City Clerk, opened 02-16-2021. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.

Case Details

Case Number
20210128
Case Type
Appeal
Case Subtype
In Cam
Status
Closed
Requester
Colman Herman
Custodian
Attleboro, City of - City Clerk
Date Opened
02-16-2021
Date Closed
02-19-2021
Date Request Submitted
09-23-2020
Response Provided Date
01-03-2021
Processing Fees Charged
0.00
Petitions Regarding Fees
No
Time to Comply
22 Business Days
Went to Court
No
In Camera Opened
02-16-2021
In Camera Closed
02-19-2021

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 February 2, 2021 SPR21/0128 Stephen K. Withers City Clerk City of Attleboro 77 Park Street Attleboro, MA 02703 Dear Mr. Withers: I have received the petition of Colman Herman appealing the response of the City of Attleboro (City) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On September 23, 2020, Mr. Herman requested a copy of an identified communication. Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR21/0006 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (January 19, 2021). Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Herman petitioned this office and SPR21/0128 was opened as a result. 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) (written response must "identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based ... "); 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). 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

Stephen K. Withers SPR21/0128 Page 2 February 2, 2021 In camera inspection In order to facilitate a determination as to the applicability of the City's claims to withhold the records in their entirety, the City must provide this office with an un-redacted copy of the responsive records for in camera inspection. After I complete my review of the documents, I will return the records to your custody and issue an opinion on the public or exempt nature of the record. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(4). The authority to require the submission of records for an in camera inspection emanates from the Code of Massachusetts Regulations, 950 C.M.R. 32.08(4); see also G.L. c. 66, § 1. This office interprets the in camera inspection process to be analogous to that utilized by the judicial system. See Rock v. Massachusetts Comm'n Against Discrimination, 384 Mass. 198, 206 (1981) (administrative agency entitled deference in the interpretation of its own regulations). Records are not voluntarily submitted, but rather are submitted pursuant to an order by this office that an in camera inspection is necessary to make a proper finding. Records are submitted for the limited purpose of review. This office is not the custodian of records examined in camera, therefore, any request made to this office for records being reviewed in camera will be denied. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(4)(c). This office has a long history of cooperation with governmental agencies with respect to in camera inspection. Custodians submit copies of the relevant records to this office upon a promise of confidentiality. This office does not release records reviewed in camera to anyone under any circumstances. Upon a determination of the public record status, records reviewed in camera are promptly returned to the custodian. To operate in any other fashion would seriously impede our ability to function and would certainly affect our credibility within the legal community. Please be aware, any cover letter submitted to accompany the relevant records may be subject to disclosure. Order Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide this office with an un-redacted copy of the responsive records for in camera inspection without delay. Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Colman Herman