MA Public Records Search
← Back to Search

Kelly Secrest v. Gloucester, City of - City Clerk (SPR 20220557)

Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency must provide records · Filed 03-07-2022

ClosedTime PetitionPetitioner Won

SPR 20220557 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Kelly Secrest concerning records held by Gloucester, City of - City Clerk, opened 03-07-2022. Type: Time Petition. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency must provide records.

Case Details

Case Number
20220557
Case Type
Time Petition
Case Subtype
Initial
Status
Closed
Requester
Kelly Secrest
Custodian
Gloucester, City of - City Clerk
Date Opened
03-07-2022
Date Closed
03-14-2022

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 March 14, 2022 SPR22/0557 Joanne M. Senos Records Access Officer 9 Dale Avenue Gloucester, MA 01930 Dear Ms. Senos: I have received your petition on behalf of the City of Gloucester (City) seeking an extension of time to produce records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). As required by law, it is my understanding that the City furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor. Id. On February 22, 2022, Kelly Secrest requested “[a]ll emails, texts, phone calls, documents, data, videos, photos, written correspondence, etc. that mention Kelly Secrest and or Kelly Linehan.” Petition 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; (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 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

Joanne M. Senos SPR22/0557 Page 2 February 14, 2022 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 March 7, 2022 petition, the City requests “…an extension of 7 business days (7) to fulfill a public records request submitted by Kelly Secrest on February 22, 2022.” The City notes, “[t]he IT Department for the City has gathered almost 700 emails which need to be reviewed and segregated to determine which emails are responsive and can be produced. If there are emails that are not able to be produced, the City will provide an itemized list of those that cannot be released.” The City posits that “[t]his task can only be completed by the staff in the City of Gloucester Legal Department. Due to several other urgent legal matters and staffing issues, this task cannot be completed within the 10 business days …The City is confident that this task can be completed within the requested 7 business days.” Conclusion I find the City has established good cause to permit an extension of time. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(c)(i)-(iv). I hereby grant the City an extension of 7 business days to furnish copies of records responsive to Ms. Secrest’s request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). To the extent possible, the City must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Any fee estimate by the City must be in compliance with this determination, the Public Records Law, and its Access Regulations. Please note, Ms. Secrest has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the appropriate superior court. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(4),10A(c). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Kelly Secrest Krisna M. Basu, Esq.