Frank Wood v. Framingham, City of (SPR 20231820)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records August 9, 2023 SPR23/1820 Paul J. Iversen Records Access Officer Mayor’s Office City of Framingham 150 Concord Street Framingham, MA 01702 Dear Mr. Iversen: I have received the petition of Frank Wood appealing the response of the City of Framingham (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On July 24, 2023, Mr. Wood requested the following records: [1.] All emails in [a named individual’s] email box that mention ‘heavy content’ in the final 6 months of her employment[;] [2.] A list of all ‘heavy content’ properties and housing units in the city. Most current version. The City responded on August 7, 2023. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Mr. Wood petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR23/1820, 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 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

Paul J. Iversen SPR23/1820 Page 2 August 9, 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 City’s August 7th Response In its August 7, 2023 response, the City stated to Mr. Wood that “[t]he City intends to provide these records to you.” The City explained that “responding to this request within 10 business days places an undue burden on the responsibilities of the City” and that “[a]s a result, the City is extending the due date for this request by 15 business days.” In his August 7, 2023 appeal, Mr. Wood argues that “[o]n the final day, the due date, the city claims that responding to this request places an undue burden on the responsibilities of the city without giving a time or cost estimate, and doesn’t give a specific reason how this request puts an undue burden on the city.” Where the City has indicated it intends to provide a response within the allowed statutory timeframe, it is unclear the basis of Mr. Wood’s appeal. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Conclusion In compliance with the Public Records Law, the Supervisor of Records may only issue determinations where a violation of G. L. c. 66, § 10 has occurred. G. L. c. 66, § 10A (a). Given that no violation of G. L. c. 66, § 10 has been asserted by Mr. Wood in his appeal petition, I am unable to issue a determination at this time. If Mr. Wood is not satisfied with the resolution of this administrative appeal, please be advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth. See G. L. c. 66, § l0A(c). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Frank Wood