Good Citizen v. Boston, City of - Public Records (SPR 20242819)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records October 28, 2024 SPR24/2819 Shawn A. Williams, Esq. Director of Public Records City of Boston One City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney Williams: I have received the petition of Good Citizen (requestor) appealing the response of the City of Boston (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On September 6, 2024, the requestor requested: [E]lectronic copies of all communications involving public records request R002270-060524 and/or Supervisor of Records appeal SPR24/2001. This request encompasses any documentation of such communication, including but not limited to: emails, letters, memos, text messages, transcripts of verbal discussion, audio recordings of verbal discussions, video recordings of verbal discussion, and responses to the request or appeal. This request is only for messages that explicitly include the terms R002270-060524 or SPR24/2001, but also, for example, entire email threads even if not every message explicitly mentions the aforementioned terms, and messages which use an abbreviated or differently formatted version of the request number or appeal number. To be clear, I would like all public records regarding the aforementioned request and appeal, regardless of which [C]ity representative was involved in the communication, and whether the communication was wholly internal or involved outside parties, and whether a public official was the initiator or recipient of a communication. The time window in which to search for these communications is between June 4th, 2024 and the time of request response/fulfillment. I request not only the body content of such messages but also any available timestamps for such messages, file attachments for electronic communications, and the relevant contact information of public employees and [C]ity representatives involved in these correspondences (e.g. email addresses, phone numbers, mailing addresses). 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

Shawn A. Williams, Esq. SPR24/2819 Page 2 October 28, 2024 On September 26, 2024, the City acknowledged the request and provided the following reference number R003614-090624 for tracking purposes. On September 20, 2024, the City provided a response. Unsatisfied with the September 20th response, the requestor petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR24/2819, 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. 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 September 20th response In its September 20, 2024 response, the City asserted, “[d]ue to the nature of your request additional time is needed. As such, the City will need up to, but no more than, fifteen (15) additional business days to review and process your request.” Current appeal In the petition, the requestor states, “1. 25 business days have now passed since I submitted this request, and thus the requested extension time has now elapsed, and I have received neither a denial nor any records responsive to my request. 2. M. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(v) states that a request for extended time shall include ‘a detailed statement describing why the magnitude or difficulty of the request unduly burdens the other responsibilities of the agency or municipality and therefore requires additional time to produce the public records sought’. The reply from [the City] on June 20th simply states ‘Due to the nature of your request, additional time is needed.’, which falls clearly short of the ‘detailed statement’ standard.”

Shawn A. Williams, Esq. SPR24/2819 Page 3 October 28, 2024 Timeliness in providing 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, that the requestor may voluntarily agree to a response date beyond the timeframes set forth herein. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Where the requestor submitted the request on September 6, 2024, and the City has not provided the responsive records, nor cited an exemption for withholding records, I find the City has not met its burden in responding to the request in accordance with G. L c. 66, § 10(b). Consequently, the City must provide an estimated date as to when it intends to complete the search and provide the responsive 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 the requestor 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. The requestor 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: Good Citizen