Laura Crimaldi v. Everett, City of - Mayor's Office (SPR 20241612)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records June 11, 2024 SPR24/1612 Erin Deveney Records Access Officer City of Everett 484 Broadway Everett, MA 02149 Dear Ms. Deveney: I have received the petition of Laura Crimaldi, on behalf of Matt Stout, both of the Boston Globe, 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 March 18, 2024, Mr. Stout requested: [1] Copies of any/all written communication sent or received by the mayor or his staff — including, but not limited, to emails, memos, or letters — from Jan. 1, 2022 to present that includes any of these phrases: Alford Street; Kraft; soccer stadium; Constellation; or Designated Port Area or DPA; [2] Copies of any/all text messages sent or received by the mayor from Jan. 1, 2022 to present that include any of these phrases: Alford Street; Kraft; soccer stadium; Constellation; or Designated PortArea or DPA; [3] Copies of the mayor’s daily calendar from Jan. 1, 2022 to present. Prior Appeal The requested records were the subject of a prior appeal. See SPR24/1004 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (April 12, 2024). In my April 12th determination, I ordered the City to provide Ms. Crimaldi a response. The City responded on March 18, 2024 and May 23, 2024. Unsatisfied with the responses, Ms. Crimaldi petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR24/1612, was opened as a result. 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

Erin Deveney SPR24/1612 Page 2 June 11, 2024 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(d)(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. The City’s March 18th and May 23rd responses In its March 18, 2024 response, the City asserted, “[i]f in the opinion of the reviewer it is determined that original due date cannot be met despite reasonable effort, the due date shall be extended based on reviewer’s judgment. You will be promptly notified in such case with revised due date.” In its May 23, 2024 response, the City stated, “[t]he mayor’s office did do a separate search. Those communications in which ‘[an identified individual]’ is labeled on the top of the page are the communications from the mayor’s office and these documents would satisfy 2024- 0253 sic.” Current appeal In her appeal, Ms. Crimaldi acknowledges that “[o]n May 20, 2024, the City provided redacted copies of the mayor’s calendar from Jan. 1, 2022 until May 6, 2024.” In light of the above, it is unclear whether the City possesses records responsive to Items 1 and 2 of the request. 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). 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); see also G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). The City must clarify whether additional records exist.

Erin Deveney SPR24/1612 Page 3 June 11, 2024 Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Ms. Crimaldi with a response, 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. Ms. Crimaldi may appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Laura Crimaldi