Theodore Somach v. Manchester-by-the-Sea, Town of - (SPR 20213032)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records November 19, 2021 SPR21/3023 Michele E. Randazzo, Esq. KP Law 101 Arch Street, 12th Floor Boston, MA 02110 Dear Attorney Randazzo: I have received your petition on behalf of the Town of Manchester by the Sea (Town) seeking relief from its obligation to produce responsive records requested by Theodore Somach. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). As required by law, the Town furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). On November 3, 2021, Mr. Somach requested “…all records pertaining to [an identified individual].” On November 9, 2021, Mr. Somach requested “…a full record of the 8000 calls for service as declared on video recording by [an identified individual] during the October MBTS Board of Selectmen meeting.” Petitions for relief from obligation to provide public records 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; (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). 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

Michele E. Randazzo, Esq. SPR21/3032 November 19, 2021 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 The Town’s November 16, 2021 petition states, “I write to you pursuant to G.L. c. 66, §10 and 950 CMR 32.00 et seq., to petition for relief from the ongoing and harassing public records requests.” The Town contends that it “…should be relieved from providing copies of the records sought…because the Requestor’s requests are part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass the Town and its public officials, as part of an ongoing harassment campaign.” The Town explains, “[t]hese public records requests come interspersed with over approximately 270 e-mails and other electronic communications over the past six months, continuing to the present time (most recently several e-mails on November 15, 2021).” The Town notes “…the Requestor bombarded the Town with approximately 80 electronic communications over a ten-day period (August 13 – August 22, 2021). Included in these numerous communications were 14 distinct public records requests, which by their very nature are inflammatory, accusatory, and harassing.” The Town asserts that “[t]hese ‘rapid-fire’ e-mail communications are often sent directly in response to a fee estimate or other written response to the Requestor’s latest round of prior public records requests. Rather than pay any fee estimate or even appeal to the Supervisor, the Requestor simply makes many more requests, often times duplicative or overlapping of prior requests for which he has already been provided a fee estimate, but failed to pay…the Requestor has no intention of paying any fee estimates.” The November 16th petition states “…the Requestor in good faith has been either provided records; told records do not exist; and/or provided a fee estimate.” The Town posits that the “Requestor has never paid any fee estimate. The Requestor has never filed any appeals with the Supervisor of Records.” In addition, the Town claims “[t]he Requestor’s communications use highly inflammatory and harassing words and phrases…” Further, “[i]n these communications, the Requestor accuses current and former police department and school personnel of a variety of criminal and civil misconduct, repeatedly stating an intent to pursue criminal charges and civil lawsuits against the Town and current/former personnel, asserting broad-scale corruption, conflict of interest, and illegal behavior against town employees and private parties.”

Michele E. Randazzo, Esq. SPR21/3032 November 19, 2021 Conclusion I grant the Town’s request for relief of its obligation to provide public records responsive to Mr. Somach’s November 3rd and 9th requests. Please note that Mr. Somach has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the superior court. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Theodore Somach