Joseph Viglione v. Medford, City of (SPR 20212159)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records September 8, 2021 SPR21/2159 Kimberly Scanlon, Esq. City Solicitor/Records Access Officer City of Medford 85 George P. Hassett Drive Medford, MA 02155 Dear Attorney Scanlon: I have received the petition of Joe Viglione appealing the response of the City of Medford to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On August 9, 2021, Mr. Viglione requested the following: [1] The document giving permission to [named person] to post his legal title on Linked In as Chief People Officer [2] The document that shows that [named person] pays Medford Excise Tax on his [car] [3] Is [Named Person’s] [Car] registered as being in Medford? Is there a document from the Registry of Motor Vehicles that Medford has? [4] … I would like to see the log in the clerk’s office where [named person] was upfront with the public about his conflict. [5] In the Medford Transcript 6/24/21 it noted something about [named person] being the subject of an ethics investigation by the city of Medford. I would like a copy of that document to publish to my readers. [6] All documents displaying how [Named Person] paid himself via the stipends and other monies [7]… [ a copy of] an Open Meeting Law complaint violation. On August 23, 2021, the City responded. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Mr. Viglione petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR21/2159, 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 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

Kimberly Scanlon, Esq. SPR21/2159 Page 2 September 8, 2021 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 August 23rd response In its August 23, 2021 response, the City produced responsive records to parts 1, 3, 4, and 7 of the request. The City did not provide responsive records for parts 2, 5, and 6. Current Appeal In his current appeal, Mr. Viglione suggested that there are additional responsive records to his request. Records in existence 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 light of the issues raised in Mr. Viglione’s appeal regarding the existence of responsive records, I find it is unclear whether responsive records exist, and if they do, why they have not been provided. The City must clarify this issue. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Mr. Viglione with a response to his request in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within ten (10) 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, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Joe Viglione