← Back to Search
Stanley Mazurczyk v. Chelmsford, Town of - Town Manager (SPR 20231915)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 08-17-2023
ClosedAppealPetitioner Won
SPR 20231915 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Stanley Mazurczyk concerning records held by Chelmsford, Town of - Town Manager, opened 08-17-2023. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20231915
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Stanley Mazurczyk
- Custodian
- Chelmsford, Town of - Town Manager
- Date Opened
- 08-17-2023
- Date Closed
- 08-31-2023
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 August 31, 2023 SPR23/1915 Paul Cohen Town Manager Town of Chelmsford 50 Billerica Road Chelmsford, MA 01824 Dear Mr. Cohen: I have received the petition of Stanley Mazurczyk appealing the response of the Town of Chelmsford (Town) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On April 10, 2023 Mr. Mazurczyk stated: This is a request for records. Attached please find the response dated December 21, 2022 from [the Town] provided in response to SPR22/2829….It’s unclear how many incoming/outgoing calls; [1] involve the same individual(s), [2] were made during business hours are personal, [3] were made during business hours are juvenile offender related, [4] were made on weekends or outside business hours are juvenile offender related, [5] were made on weekends or outside business hours are personal. This information wasn’t provided to assess if fee estimate is reasonable. It doesn’t require redaction or segregation. It should be noted that during FY2021 and FY2022 there were zero (0) Juvenile Arrests in the Town (see attached police statistics). These statistics don’t support [an identified individual’s] claim that most of her incoming/outgoing calls are juvenile offender related. Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR23/0840 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (May 11, 2023). In my May 11th determination, I ordered the Town to provide Mr. Mazurczyk with a response to his request. On May 23, 2023, the Town responded. Unsatisfied with the Town’s response, Mr. Mazurczyk petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR23/1915, was opened as a result. 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 Cohen SPR23/1915 Page 2 August 31, 2023 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. 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 May 23rd Response In its May 23, 2023 response, the Town states: This matter relates to a public records request filed by Stanley Mazurczyk regarding the Verizon telephone records of [an identified individual]. The Town received the original public records request from Mr. Mazurczyk on November 25, 2022. On December 9, 2022, the Town submitted a formal Petition to Assess Fees with the Supervisor of Public Records. On December 16, 2022, the Supervisor of Public Records provided a determination pursuant to case number 22/2829 approving the Town’s fee petition, but requiring the Town to provide additional detail within five (5) business days. The Town provided the additional detail to the Supervisor of Public Records on December 20, 2022. The determination from the Supervisor also stated that Mr. Mazurczyk could appeal the fee estimate within ninety (90) days. Rather than file an appeal of the Town’s fee estimate, Mr. Mazurczyk submitted a new public records request with the Town. This purported public records request sought information involving the fee petition filed by the Town, requesting information for each incoming/outgoing call: “[1] [whether it] involve[s] the same individual(s), [2] were made during business hours are personal, [3] were made during business hours are juvenile offender related, [4] were made on weekends or outside business hours are juvenile offender related, [5] were made on weekends or outside business hours are personal.” This information is exactly the sort of information that was the basis of the Town’s fee petition, as the process of identifying and categorizing each of these calls would take a significant amount of Paul Cohen SPR23/1915 Page 3 August 31, 2023 time for both the School Resource officer in question and Town Counsel. Mr. Mazurczyk’s public records request was an attempt to circumvent the need to appeal the fee petition approved by the Supervisor. This was not a legitimate public records request, and did not require a response by the Town.… Based on the Town’s response, in conjunction with Mr. Mazurczyk’s appeal, it is unclear if the Town possesses records responsive to the 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). To the extent that records exist, I find the Town must provide them in a manner consistent with the Public Records Law or identify an exemption that applies to withhold the records from disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b). See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). Conclusion Accordingly, the Town is ordered to provide Mr. Mazurczyk 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 the response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Stanley Mazurczyk