← Back to Search
Thomas Greene v. Blackstone, Town of (SPR 20230130)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 02-07-2023
ClosedAppealPetitioner Won
SPR 20230130 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Thomas Greene concerning records held by Blackstone, Town of, opened 02-07-2023. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20230130
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- In Cam
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Thomas Greene
- Custodian
- Blackstone, Town of
- Date Opened
- 02-07-2023
- Date Closed
- 03-10-2023
- In Camera Opened
- 02-07-2023
- In Camera Closed
- 03-10-2023
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records February 6, 2023 SPR23/0130 Dori Vecchio Town Administrator Town of Blackstone 15 St. Paul Street Blackstone, MA 01504 Dear Ms. Vecchio: I have received the petition of Thomas Greene appealing the response of the Town of Blackstone (Town) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On December 2, 2022, Mr. Greene requested the background investigation report of the Town Administrator. Previous appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR22/2889 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (January 4, 2023). The Town provided a response January 19, 2023. Unsatisfied with the Town’s response, Mr. Greene petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR23/0130, 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). To meet the specificity requirement a custodian must not only cite an exemption, but must also state why the exemption applies to the withheld 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 Dori Vecchio SPR23/0130 Page 2 February 6, 2023 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 January 19th response In its January 19, 2023 response, the Town cited Exemptions (a) and (c) of the Public Records Law to withhold the requested records. Exemption (a) Exemption (a), known as the statutory exemption, permits the withholding of records that are: specifically or by necessary implication exempted from disclosure by statute G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(a). A governmental entity may use the statutory exemption as a basis for withholding requested materials where the language of the exempting statute relied upon expressly or necessarily implies that the public’s right to inspect records under the Public Records Law is restricted. See Att’y Gen. v. Collector of Lynn, 377 Mass. 151, 54 (1979); Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. v. Appeals Court, 372 Mass. 539, 545-46 (1977). This exemption creates two categories of exempt records. The first category includes records that are specifically exempt from disclosure by statute. Such statutes expressly state that such a record either “shall not be a public record,” “shall be kept confidential” or “shall not be subject to the disclosure provision of the Public Records Law.” The second category under the exemption includes records deemed exempt under statute by necessary implication. Such statutes expressly limit the dissemination of particular records to a defined group of individuals or entities. A statute is not a basis for exemption if it merely lists individuals or entities to whom the records are to be provided; the statute must expressly limit access to the listed individuals or entities. In support of withholding pursuant to Exemption (a), the Town cited the Fair Credit Reporting Act (Act). The Act provides in pertinent part: (1) In general — The term “consumer report” means any written, oral, or other communication of any information by a consumer reporting agency bearing on a consumer’s credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living which is used or Dori Vecchio SPR23/0130 Page 3 February 6, 2023 expected to be used or collected in whole or in part for the purpose of serving as a factor in establishing the consumer’s eligibility for— (A) credit or insurance to be used primarily for personal, family, or household purposes; (B) employment purposes; or (C) any other purpose authorized under section 1681b of this title. 15 USC § 1681a(d)(1). In its January 19, 2023 response, the Town stated that “…this report is protected from disclosure by the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 USC 1681), a federal law that regulates the use and collection of confidential information that applies directly to credit reports and consumer reports.” The Town further stated that “…a background report, such as the one at issue here, is a ‘consumer report’ under the FCRA when it serves as a factor for determining a person’s eligibility for employment and includes information ‘bearing on a consumer’s credit, worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living.’” The Town further stated that “[t]his report is also protected by M. G. L. c.93H, as it contains financial account numbers, [the town administrator’s] name, and social security number.” Exemption (c) Exemption (c) permits the withholding of: personnel and medical files or information and any other materials or data relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy; provided, however, that this subclause shall not apply to records related to a law enforcement misconduct investigation. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c). Analysis under Exemption (c) is subjective in nature and requires a balancing of the public’s right to know against the relevant privacy interests at stake. Torres v. Att’y Gen., 391 Mass. 1, 9 (1984); Att’y Gen. v. Assistant Comm’r of Real Property Dep’t, 380 Mass. 623, 625 (1980). Therefore, determinations must be made on a case by case basis. This exemption does not protect all data relating to specifically named individuals. Rather, there are factors to consider when assessing the weight of the privacy interest at stake: (1) whether disclosure would result in personal embarrassment to an individual of normal sensibilities; (2) whether the materials sought contain intimate details of a highly personal nature; and (3) whether the same information is available from other sources. See People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) v. Dep’t of Agric. Res., 477 Mass. 280, 292 (2017). Dori Vecchio SPR23/0130 Page 4 February 6, 2023 The types of personal information which this exemption is designed to protect includes: marital status, paternity, substance abuse, government assistance, family disputes and reputation. Id. at 292 n.13; see also Doe v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, 26 Mass. App. Ct. 415, 427 (1988) (holding that a motor vehicle licensee has a privacy interest in disclosure of his social security number). This exemption requires a balancing test which provides that where the public interest in obtaining the requested information substantially outweighs the seriousness of any invasion of privacy, the private interest in preventing disclosure must yield. PETA, 477 Mass. at 291. The public has a recognized interest in knowing whether public servants are carrying out their duties in a law-abiding and efficient manner. Id. at 292. In its response, the Town stated that “…the outcome of the weight of the privacy balancing test falls in favor of withholding the record from release.” The Town further explained that “…while the release of the record would not result in personal embarrassment to [the town official], the record contains intimate details of a highly personal nature…[and] the same information is not available from other sources.” In camera inspection In order to facilitate a determination as to the applicability of the exemption claims made by the Town to withhold the records, the Town must provide this office with an un-redacted copy of the responsive records for in camera inspection. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(4). After I complete my review of the records, I will return the records to the Town’s custody and issue an opinion on the public or exempt nature of the record. The authority to require the submission of records for an in camera inspection emanates from the Code of Massachusetts Regulations. 950 C.M.R. 32.08(4); see also G. L. c. 66, § 1. This office interprets the in camera inspection process to be analogous to that utilized by the judicial system. See Rock v. Mass. Comm’n Against Discrimination, 384 Mass. 198, 206 (1981) (administrative agency entitled deference in the interpretation of its own regulations). Records are not voluntarily submitted, but rather are submitted pursuant to an order by this office that an in camera inspection is necessary to make a proper finding. Records are submitted for the limited purpose of review. This office is not the custodian of records examined in camera, therefore, any request made to this office for records being reviewed in camera will be denied. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(4)(c). This office has a long history of cooperation with governmental agencies with respect to in camera inspection. Custodians submit copies of the relevant records to this office upon a promise of confidentiality. This office does not release records reviewed in camera to anyone under any circumstances. Upon a determination of the public record status, records reviewed in camera are promptly returned to the custodian. To operate in any other fashion would seriously impede our ability to function and would certainly affect our credibility within the legal Dori Vecchio SPR23/0130 Page 5 February 6, 2023 community. Please be aware, any cover letter submitted to accompany the relevant records may be subject to disclosure. Order Accordingly, the Town is ordered to provide this office with an un-redacted copy of the responsive records for in camera inspection without delay. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Thomas Greene