Peter Vickery, Esq. v. Boston, City of - Public Records (SPR 20221001)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records May 12, 2022 SPR22/1001 Shawn A. Williams, Esq. Director of Public Records Records Access Officer City of Boston 1 City Hall Plaza, Room 615 Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney Williams: I have received the petition of Peter Vickery, Esq. of Bobrowski & Vickery, LLC appealing the response of the City of Boston (City) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On March 28, 2022, Attorney Vickery requested five categories of records relating to the “Mayor’s Rent Stabilization Advisory Committee.” Prior Appeal The requested records were the subject of a prior appeal. See SPR22/0857 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (April 27, 2022). In my April 27th determination, I ordered the City to produce a response. On April 28, 2022, the City responded. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Attorney Vickery petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR22/1001, 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 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 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

Shawn A. Williams, Esq. SPR22/1001 Page 2 May 12, 2022 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. Current Appeal In his current appeal, Attorney Vickery suggests that the City has additional responsive records. The City’s April 29th response In the City’s April 29, 2022, response it stated that it did not have responsive records for four out of the five categories in the request. Regarding the fifth category in the request which was a request for emails from March 11, 2022 to March 14, 2022, the City only provided a single email. Based on the City’s response, it is unclear if it possesses additional records responsive to the above request. 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). Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Attorney Vickery with a response to the request, provided 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: Peter Vickery, Esq.