Steve Douillette v. Quincy, City of - Office of the City Clerk (SPR 20241499)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records May 30, 2024 SPR24/1499 Brenda G. Fernandez Public Records Coordinator City of Quincy Office of the City Clerk 1305 Hancock Street Quincy, MA 02169 Dear Ms. Fernandez: I have received the petition of Steve Douillette appealing the response of the City of Quincy (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On April 7, 2024, Mr. Douillette requested “the full names of the 7 individuals with permission to manage the … official City of Quincy Facebook page.” Previous Appeal The records sought were the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR24/1410 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (May 16, 2024). In my May 16th determination, I closed Mr. Douillette’s appeal because the City provided a supplemental response on May 13, 2024. Unsatisfied with the City’s supplemental response, Mr. Douillette petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR24/1499, 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 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

Brenda G. Fernandez SPR24/1499 Page 2 May 30, 2024 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. The City’s May 13th Response In its May 13, 2024 response, the City provided responsive records. The City emailed Mr. Douillette with 5 of the 7 named individuals he was looking for. Current Appeal Mr. Douillette responded to the City requesting the complete list of names. In his appeal petition, Mr. Douilette stated, “. . . the provided information was incomplete. I received a list of 5 individuals when Facebook’s database indicates the list contains 7 people. I notified [the City] of this discrepancy by e-mail on 5/14/24 . . . requesting the full list and have not received a response.” The City is advised that 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). In accordance with the Public Records Law, custodians are expected to use their superior knowledge of the records in their custody to assist requestors in obtaining the desired information. See 950 C.M.R. 32.04(5). Based on the names already provided by the City, and the information provided in Mr. Douillette’s appeal petition, it is unclear whether the City possesses additional responsive records. The City must clarify this. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Mr. Douillette with a response to his request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within ten 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: Steve Douillette