← Back to Search
Joan P. Beckta v. Everett, City of - Office of the City Clerk (SPR 20232493)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 10-20-2023
ClosedAppealPetitioner Won
SPR 20232493 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Joan P. Beckta concerning records held by Everett, City of - Office of the City Clerk, opened 10-20-2023. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20232493
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Joan P. Beckta
- Date Opened
- 10-20-2023
- Date Closed
- 11-02-2023
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 November 2, 2023 SPR23/2493 Colleen Mejia, Esq. City Solicitor City of Everett 484 Broadway, Room 10 Everett, MA 02149 Dear Attorney Mejia: I have received the petition of Joan P. Beckta appealing the response of the City of Everett (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On July 21, 2023, Ms. Beckta requested “[m]inutes of the 2023 Planning Board meetings. There should be 7, not counting June. Please send me the draft notes for June, as the minutes probably haven’t been approved yet but the law allows for the provision of draft notes.” In an August 7, 2023 response, the City stated, “[a]ttached are the approved Planning Board Minutes from 2023. In reviewing the documents, I noticed that January 3, 2023 and June 5, 2023 are not included – Jeannie will re-do the January Minutes ASAP as she could not locate them in her files and is currently working on the June Minutes which do not yet have a draft document. So as to save you from entering another [Public Records] request, I will follow up via email with the aforementioned documents whey they are produced to me.” On August 29, 2023, Ms. Beckta followed up with the City, asserting, “…I still have not been provided with the minutes for the JANUARY 3, 2023 Planning Board meeting. I see on the Aug. agenda that the May minutes were up for approval, so I guess you’re still behind there and that I will eventually get the minutes for the June meeting.” Again, Ms. Beckta followed up with the City, stating, “[r]e: Planning Board Minutes for 2023. I still have not received the minutes for Jan. 2023 or June 2023 and I do not see approval of the June minutes on the Oct. agenda. I would appreciate it if you would attend to this matter. Thank you.” On October 20, 2023, after not receiving the requested 2023 Planning Board minutes; nor, a status update regarding her request, Ms. Beckta petitioned the Supervisor of Records, and this appeal was opened. 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 Colleen Mejia, Esq. SPR23/2493 Page 2 November 2, 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) (written response must “identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based…”); 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). 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. Current Appeal In Ms. Beckta’s petition, she states, “I am appealing the Planning [Board] scoffing at the Public Records [L]aw for the second year in a row. In July, I requested minutes of the 2023 Planning Board meetings. These could have been posted to our website but they never are; most other [Open Meeting Law] meetings are.” In addition, Ms. Beckta asserts, “I still have not [received] January and June [meeting minutes] of 2023.” Timeliness of the response and/or production of records G. L. c. 66, § 10(b) provides, in pertinent part, that if the magnitude or difficulty of the request unduly burdens the other responsibilities of the agency or municipality such that the agency or municipality cannot provide records within 10 business days, the agency or municipality must inform the requestor in writing within 10 business days. With respect to the timeframe to produce responsive records, the written response shall: identify a reasonable timeframe in which the agency or municipality shall produce the public records sought; provided, that for an agency, the timeframe shall not exceed 15 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records and for a municipality the timeframe shall not exceed 25 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records; and provided further, Colleen Mejia, Esq. SPR23/2493 Page 3 November 2, 2023 that the requestor may voluntarily agree to a response date beyond the timeframes set forth herein. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Whereas Ms. Beckta’s request was submitted on July 21, 2023, and the City has not provided the balance of the records responsive to her request, I find the City has not met its burden in responding to the request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Consequently, I find the City must provide an estimated date as to when it intends to provide the outstanding records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the City must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Ms. Beckta 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: Joan P. Beckta Matt Lattanzi