Commonwealth Transparency v. Department of Occupational Licensure (SPR 20220930)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records April 27, 2022 SPR22/0930 Clinton W. Dick, Esq. Division of Occupational Licensure 1000 Washington Street, Suite 710 Boston, MA 02118-6100 Dear Attorney Dick: I have received your petition on behalf of the Division of Occupational Licensure (Division) seeking an extension of time to produce records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). As required by law, it is my understanding that the Division furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor. Id. On April 6, 2022, Commonwealth Transparency requested “[a]ny and all emails between any person working for, performing any duties for or in any way representing the Architectural Access Board (AAB) and any email address ending in ‘@cityofmalden.org’…[f]or the time period January 1, 2019 through the date [the Division responded] with all responsive documents.” 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). 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

Clinton W. Dick, Esq. SPR22/0930 Page 2 April 27, 2022 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 In its April 20, 2022 petition, the Division seeks “…an extension of time to furnish copies of requested records with regards to the above referenced request pursuant to 950 CMR 32.06(4).” Specifically, the Division seeks “…an extension of fifteen (15) business days from the date of this letter.” The Division states, “[t]he request in question involves a search of emails from several individuals at the Division. Any identified responsive records will require a review and possible redaction of attorney-client communications, among other possible exemptions. The nature of this search and review means that the Division requires additional time to gather, review, segregate, and prepare potentially responsive records for production. Note that the Division is NOT seeking to be relieved of its obligation to provide copies of the records sought.” I find that in light of the volume of records, as well as the potential scope of redactions, the Division has established good cause to permit an extension of time. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(c)(i)-(iv). I hereby grant the Division an extension of 15 business days to furnish copies of records responsive to Commonwealth Transparency’s request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). To the extent possible, the Division must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Conclusion Accordingly, I find the Division has established good cause for a time extension of 15 business days as described above. Please note, Commonwealth Transparency 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).

Clinton W. Dick, Esq. SPR22/0930 Page 3 April 27, 2022 Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Commonwealth Transparency Andrew T. Perrino