← Back to Search
Laurie Barham v. Marblehead, Town of (SPR 20221166)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Public records appeal decision · Filed 05-18-2022
ClosedAppealDecision
SPR 20221166 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Laurie Barham concerning records held by Marblehead, Town of, opened 05-18-2022. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Public records appeal decision.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20221166
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Laurie Barham
- Custodian
- Marblehead, Town of
- Date Opened
- 05-18-2022
- Date Closed
- 06-01-2022
- Date Request Submitted
- 04-22-2022
- Response Provided Date
- 05-12-2022
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 June 1, 2022 SPR22/1166 Kyle A. Wiley Records Access Officer Town of Marblehead Abbott Hall 188 Washington Street Marblehead, MA 01945 Dear Ms. Wiley: I have received the petition of Laurie Barham appealing the response of the Town of Marblehead (Town) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On April 22, 2022, Ms. Barham requested a copy of the “…report of how ARPA fund projects and expenditures is due to the US Department of the Treasury on April 30th.” The Town responded on May 6, 2022 and May 12, 2022. Unsatisfied with the Town’s responses, Ms. Barham petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR22/1166 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 agency or municipality 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). The Town’s responses The Town sent the requested report to Ms. Barnham on May 6th. In its May 12th response, the Town stated, “[t]he report you received provided information on all SLFRF funded projects that were engaged in during the reporting period. Projects are new or existing eligible government 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 Kyle Wiley SPR22/1166 Page 2 June 1, 2022 services or investments funded in whole or in part by SLFRF funding. For each project, the recipient will be required to enter the project name, identification number (created by the recipient), project expenditure category description, and status of completion. Project descriptions must describe the project in sufficient detail to provide understanding of the major activities that will occur, and will be required to be between 50 and 250 words. Marblehead only formally accepted and moved forward with one project, the vaccination sites, and therefore that was the only ARPA funds expenditure activity available to report for this period. There has been discussion about other potential projects, but to date no formal commitment has been made to those projects using ARPA funds.” Current appeal In her appeal, Ms. Barham advised, “I have been trying to get information on how much Marblehead has received in ARPA funds, where the funds are held and what projects are planned to no avail. To date, the public officials to whom I have addressed these questions have told me only that $76,000 was spent on Covid testing. I have been clear that I know Marblehead is slated to receive a total of 6 million in ARPA funding.” In a telephone conversation between a Public Records Division senior attorney and a Town representative, the Town confirmed that the response sent to Ms. Barham included all records responsive to the request and no other information is available. Given that the Town did not withhold responsive records, the basis of Ms. Barham’s appeal is unclear. Ms. Barham is reminded that all petitions for appeal “shall specifically describe the nature of the requestor’s objections to the response or failure to timely respond.” 950 C.M.R. 32.08(l)(f). Conclusion Accordingly, I am unable to issue a determination at this time. Ms. Barham may wish to clarify her specific objections to the Town’s response. Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Laurie Barham