MA Public Records Search
← Back to Search

Kevin Wood v. Georgetown, Town of - Town Clerk (SPR 20233120)

Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 12-28-2023

ClosedAppealPetitioner Won

SPR 20233120 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Kevin Wood concerning records held by Georgetown, Town of - Town Clerk, opened 12-28-2023. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.

Case Details

Case Number
20233120
Case Type
Appeal
Case Subtype
Initial
Status
Closed
Requester
Kevin Wood
Custodian
Georgetown, Town of - Town Clerk
Date Opened
12-28-2023
Date Closed
01-11-2024

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 January 11, 2024 SPR23/3120 Kerri Ann McManus Town Clerk Town of Georgetown 1 Library Street Georgetown, MA 01833 Dear Ms. McManus: I have received the petition of Kevin Wood appealing the response of the Town of Georgetown (Town) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On December 23, 2023, Mr. Wood requested the following: [1.] Draft meeting minutes for 12.21.23 Conservation Commission meeting. [2.] Draft meeting minutes for 11.30.23 Conservation Commission meeting open session and executive session. The Town responded on December 28, 2023, denying the request. Unsatisfied with the Town’s response, Mr. Wood appealed, and this case 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 or redacted portion of the responsive record. 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

Kerri Ann McManus SPR23/3120 Page 2 January 11, 2024 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 December 28th Response In its December 28, 2023 response, the Town states that “draft minutes are never released” and reiterates that “draft minutes are not [a public record].” The Town is advised that under the Public Records Law, the burden shall be on the custodian to establish the applicability of an exemption to withhold or redact records. Based on the Town’s response, it is unclear which exemption the Town is citing in order to withhold the requested draft minutes. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv) (a 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”). See also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Police Comm’r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); Flatley, 419 Mass. at 511; Reinstein v. Police Comm’r of Boston, 378 Mass. 281, 289-90 (1979) (the statutory exemptions are narrowly construed and are not blanket in nature). Mr. Wood’s appeal petition also raise several issues potentially related to the Open Meeting Law. See G. L. c. 30A, § 22(f). Given that an interpretation of the Open Meeting Law falls within the authority of the Office of the Attorney General and not this office, I decline to address those issues in this determination. See G. L. c. 30A, § 23. Conclusion Accordingly, the Town is ordered to provide Mr. Wood 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: Kevin Wood