Stephen J. Morgan v. Ashland, Town of - Public Schools (SPR 20210783)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records April 7, 2021 SPR21/0783 Maegan Dos Anjos Town of Ashland 101 Main Street Ashland, MA 01721 Dear Ms. Dos Anjos: I have received the petition of Stephen Morgan appealing the response of the Town of Ashland (Town) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On March 24, 2021, Mr. Morgan requested “any updated documents regarding the Mindess school review” and “updated submissions to the board following the site walk. Any correspondence sent to other boards regarding this project.” The Town responded on March 26, 2021, providing two responsive documents. Unsatisfied with the Town’s response, Mr. Morgan appealed, and this case was opened as a result. Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Morgan contends “[t]hese two documents are not all of the documents related to this project. Of particular note [he] understand[s] a letter . . . was written by the chair on the topic of the plan” at issue. He further explains that he seeks either a letter or email “[f]rom the conservation chair to the [Board of Selectmen] related to the hearing.” The Town responded again on April 5, 2021, indicating it had “released all of the requested documents.” 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). 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

Maegan Dos Anjos SPR21/0783 Page 2 April 7, 2021 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. If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. Records in Existence Based on the Town’s response, it is unclear whether additional responsive records exist. The duty to comply with requests for records extends to those records that exist and are in the possession, custody, or control of the custodian of records at the time of the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(ii). In this case, it is unclear whether there exists correspondence between the Conservation Commission and the Board of Selectmen that would be responsive to Mr. Morgan’s request. If such correspondence exists, it is unclear why it is being withheld. The Town must clarify these matters. Conclusion Accordingly, the Town is ordered to provide Mr. Morgan with a response to his request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within ten business days. A copy of any such response must be provided to this office. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of this response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Sincerely, .· I , ' ' . - - .. . ~ Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Stephen Morgan