Justin P. Wilson-Gabor v. East Longmeadow, Town of - Town Clerk (SPR 20222243)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records October 17, 2022 SPR22/2243 Brendan L. Hughes, Esq. Counsel Town of East Longmeadow One Monarch Place, Suite 1200 Springfield, MA 01144 Dear Attorney Hughes: I have received the petition of Justin P. Wilson-Gabor appealing the response of the Town of East Longmeadow (Town) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On September 26, 2022, Dr. Wilson-Gabor requested “all emails to and from [a named individual] between July 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021 regarding the East Longmeadow Recreation Soccer Program regarding U7 through U10.” The Town responded on September 30, 2022, denying the request. Unsatisfied with the Town’s response, Dr. Wilson- Gabor appealed, and this case was opened as a result. Previous Petition This request, along with others, was the subject of a previous petition from the Longmeadow Public Schools (School) and the Town. See SPR22/2239 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (October 7, 2022). In my October 7th determination, I found that I could not grant the Town’s petition seeking relief from the obligation to produce responsive records. 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. 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

Brendan Hughes, Esq. SPR22/2243 Page 2 October 17, 2022 Att’y 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 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. The Town’s September 30th Response In its September 30, 2022 response, addressing this and numerous other requests, an attorney for the Town states that the Town “will not respond to any of these requests, or future requests related to the same subject matter, as to do so would involve hours and hours of needless document review and expenses.” In addition, the Town argues that Dr. Wilson-Gabor is “clearly utilizing an alias” and is “behind the requests from ‘Lydus Grey.’” Additionally, the Town argues that “it would take hours reviewing, segregating and redacting documents which are subject to these numerous requests. It is clear that the basis for these requests are not for a valid purpose and instead to retaliate against and harass the School District and Town.” Further, the Town states that “to the extent [the requestor is] submitting overly broad and burdensome amounts of records requests under fake aliases to try to uncover information to use against School District leaders and parents who [he has] personal issues with, [the Town] will not respond to these requests unless ordered to by the Supervisor of Public Records.” Burden of Specificity; Duty to Segregate Under the Public Records Law, the burden shall be upon the custodian to prove with specificity the exemptions which apply. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); see also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Police Comm’r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); Flatley, 419 Mass. at 511. In this case, the Town did not meet its burden of demonstrating how the responsive records are exempt from disclosure under the Public Records Law. See Reinstein v. Police Comm’r of Boston, 378 Mass. 281, 289- 90 (1979) (the statutory exemptions are narrowly construed and are not blanket in nature). The Town must produce any non-exempt, segregable portions of the public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(a). In addition, the Town did not identify the records, categories of records or portions of records in its possession that it intends to withhold from disclosure. To deny access to a record under the Public Records Law, a records access officer must identify the record, categories of records, or portions of the record it intends to withhold. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3)(c)(4).

Brendan Hughes, Esq. SPR22/2243 Page 3 October 17, 2022 Conclusion Accordingly, the Town is ordered to provide Dr. Wilson-Gabor with a response to his request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within ten business days. A copy of any such response must be provided to this office. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of the response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Justin P. Wilson-Gabor