Brian Keaney v. Dedham, Town of - Town Clerk (SPR 20240867)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 4, 2024 SPR24/0867 Paul Munchbach Town Clerk Town of Dedham 450 Washington Street Dedham, MA 02026 Dear Mr. Munchbach: I have received the petition of Brian Keaney appealing the nonresponse of the Town of Dedham (Town) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On February 14, 2024, Mr. Keaney requested “... copies of all executive sessions since August 2, 2017.” Prior Appeal This request was the subject of a prior appeal. See SPR24/0645 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (March 15, 2024). In my March 15th determination, it was my understanding that the Town provided a further response to Mr. Keaney on March 12, 2024. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Keaney petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR24/0867, 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. 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 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 Munchbach SPR24/0867 Page 2 April 4, 2024 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 March 12th Response In its March 12, 2024 response, the Town stated, “[p]lease be aware that the Town is resuming the practice of periodically reviewing executive session meeting minutes for approval and release, if applicable, and will update our public spreadsheet that is already available on our website…. With the help of Town Counsel, the Town will continue to periodically review previously withheld executive session meeting minutes that were approved by the Select Board and update the spreadsheet accordingly. The Town will also be adding the review and approval of executive session meeting minutes to upcoming Select Board agendas and provide this information to the public via the Town website and spreadsheet.” Current Appeal In his appeal, Mr. Keaney states, “[t]he further correspondence I have had with the Town Manager’s office is also in this email chain. It has not been productive in producing the documents I requested and I am thus appealing to you again.” Open Meeting Law The Town’s response, and Mr. Keaney’s appeal petition, raise 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 Attorney General’s Office (AGO) and not this office, I am unable to address those issues in this determination. See G. L. c. 30A, § 23. I encourage the parties to contact the AGO for a determination on the status of the executive session minutes. Conclusion Accordingly, I will consider this administrative appeal closed. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Brian Keaney Nancy A. Baker