Paul DeMeo v. Gardner, City of - Law Department (SPR 20232067)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records September 6, 2023 SPR23/2067 John M. Flick, Esq. City Solicitor Flick Law Group, P.C. 144 Central Street Gardner, MA 01440 Dear Attorney Flick: On August 30, 2023, this office received your petition on behalf of the City of Gardner (City) seeking an extension of time to produce records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). As required by law, the City furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor. Id. On August 17, 2023, Paul DeMeo requested “all records you have on money received and expenditures made for the Waterford Street School from 1/1/2022 through 8/17/2023.” Mr. DeMeo specified that this request included “all records from GAAMHA Inc.” as well as “all correspondence with GAAMHA Inc.” and “any correspondence from Mayor Nicholson or any other city official relative to the [sic] Mayor Nicholson’s request for a loan order in [a particular amount].” Please note that in an email to this office and the City on August 30, 2023, Mr. DeMeo objected to the City’s request for an extension of time. Petition for an Extension of Time Under the Public Records Law, upon a showing of good cause, the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) may grant a single extension to an agency not to exceed 20 business days and a single extension to a municipality not to exceed 30 business days. In determining whether there has been a showing of good cause, the Supervisor shall consider, but shall not be limited to considering: (i) the need to search for, collect, segregate or examine records; (ii) the scope of redaction required to prevent unlawful disclosure; (iii) the capacity or the normal business hours of operation of the agency or municipality to produce the request without the extension; (iv) efforts undertaken by the agency or municipality in fulfilling the current request and previous requests; 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

John M. Flick, Esq. SPR23/2067 Page 2 September 6, 2023 (v) whether the request, either individually or as part of a series of requests from the same requestor, is frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality; and (vi) the public interest served by expeditious disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). If the Supervisor determines that the request is part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass, and the requests are not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, the Supervisor may grant a longer extension or relieve the agency or municipality of its obligation to provide copies of the records sought. Id. The filing of a petition does not affect the requirement that a Records Access Officer (RAO) must provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 36.06(4)(b). Request for Additional Time to Produce Responsive Records In its August 30th petition, the City requests “an extension of time to October 31, 2023 to respond” to Mr. DeMeo’s public records request. The City provides the following information in support of its request: The records sought by this request are solely in the possession of the Law Department or involve matters which the Law Department has been directly engaged. The requested records are therefore subject to the attorney client privilege as they are directly related to matters involving complex legal issues and are, therefore, exempt from production. See Suffolk Const. Co. v. Div. of Cap. Asset Mgmt., 449 Mass, 444, 460 (2007). There are matters pending before the Gardner City Council, which are being addressed in Executive Session as matters related to pending or threatened litigation and contract negotiations to which the requested records apply. The Law Department anticipates that the matter will be resolved in the next 30 to 60 days and will include the release of minutes from the City Council Executive Session proceedings. Based on the City’s petition, I find that in light of the need to segregate and examine the records, and the scope of redaction required to prevent unlawful disclosure, the City has established good cause to permit an extension of time. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c)(i)-(iv). The City is granted an extension of 30 business days. Conclusion Accordingly, I find the City has established good cause for a time extension of 30 business days as described above.

John M. Flick, Esq. SPR23/2067 Page 3 September 6, 2023 Please note, Mr. Demeo has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the appropriate superior court. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(c), 10(d)(iv)(4), 10A(c). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Paul DeMeo