Geraldine Mullaly v. Swansea, Town of - Town Administrator (SPR 20243390)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records December 27, 2024 SPR24/3390 Mallory E. Aronstein Town Administrator Town of Swansea 81 Main Street Swansea, MA 02777 Dear Ms. Aronstein: On December 19, 2024, this office received your petition on behalf of the Town of Swansea (Town) seeking relief from the obligation to produce responsive records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). As required by law, I understand that the Town furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor, Geraldine Mullaly. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On December 18, 2024, Ms. Mullaly requested: [C]opies of the following documents assumed posted/recorded by the Swansea Tree Warden regarding the National Grid annual vegetation management and annual hazard tree removal plans for FY2023, 2024 and 2025 (up to date of response) - Notice of public hearings citing: dates, times, locations, posting locations for each hearing and reason for hazard removal for each request - Minutes, correspondence, handouts, etc. presented at each of the public hearings. With its petition, and in subsequent correspondence to this office, the Town also provides summaries of 194 requests made by Ms. Mullaly in 2024, and 100 requests made in 2023. Subsequent to the opening of this case, in an email and letter to this office and Ms. Mullaly on December 20, 2024, the Town provided additional information regarding its petition. Petitions for an Extension of Time and Relief from the Obligation to Provide Records Under the Public Records Law, upon a showing of good cause, the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) may grant a single extension to an agency not to exceed 20 business days and a single extension to a municipality not to exceed 30 business days. In determining whether there has been a showing of good cause, the Supervisor shall consider, but shall not be limited to considering: 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

Mallory E. Aronstein SPR24/3390 Page 2 December 27, 2024 (i) the need to search for, collect, segregate or examine records; (ii) the scope of redaction required to prevent unlawful disclosure; (iii) the capacity or the normal business hours of operation of the agency or municipality to produce the request without the extension; (iv) efforts undertaken by the agency or municipality in fulfilling the current request and previous requests; (v) whether the request, either individually or as part of a series of requests from the same requestor, is frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality; and (vi) the public interest served by expeditious disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). If the Supervisor determines that the request is part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass, and the requests are not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, the Supervisor may grant a longer extension or relieve the agency or municipality of its obligation to provide copies of the records sought. Id. The filing of a petition does not affect the requirement that a Records Access Officer (RAO) shall provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(b). Request for Relief In its December 19, 2024 petition, the Town requests “permission from the Supervisor of Records to no longer be required to respond to any other public records requests from Ms. Geraldine Mullaly or Mr. William Mullaly relative to the tree warden and any requests from Ms. Geraldine Mullaly or Mr. William Mullaly relative to this insurance claim.” With its petition, the Town provides a number of records previously provided to Ms. Mullaly, and explains the following: She is continually seeking documents that do not exist, including vegetation plans from National Grid, directives to employees, etc., and stating that we are withholding documents. We are not. These are all the documents in the Town’s possession on the matter. ... We believe the Mullaly’s have all documents relative to this issue in the Town’s possession. The Mullaly’s have filed public records requests voraciously relative to this claim and the tree warden, and have done so in rapid succession creating confusion. The response of the insurance company is a decision beyond the town’s duties and is not reflective of any action by the Town or its agents. Additionally, in its December 20, 2024 email to this office, the Town further explains the following:

Mallory E. Aronstein SPR24/3390 Page 3 December 27, 2024 This week, Mrs. Mullaly has lodged a criminal complaint against the Tree Warden with our Police Department due to his service as a tree warden and cutting down Shade Trees. She cites Section 3 of Chapter 87, which references Section 5 of Chapter 87. She clearly ignored the provisions allowed in Section 5 pertaining to the tree warden and moved forward to file a criminal complaint (unfounded) against the tree warden. Further, this isn’t a criminal matter! Her actions, both in filing this complaint and the myriad of public records requests, is unreasonable, and harassment against the Town and its Tree Warden. Friedman v. Division of Administrative Law Appeals demonstrates quite clearly that reasonableness is a cornerstone of public information laws. Mrs. Mullaly is not acting reasonably in her fervent requests. Rather she is abusing the public records law to express her clear dissatisfaction with the tree warden and his work. The prescribed way to address such dissatisfaction with an elected official is at the polls, not making up false criminal claims or inundating municipal workers with public records requests. What’s more is that she attempts to disguise herself in using her spouse’s email address to make separate requests; therefore, we are seeking that we also will not have to respond to records requests on these two topics from Mr. William Mullaly as well. Please see the attached example detailing Mrs. Mullaly’s previous use of her spouses’ email address. We have previously reported Mrs. Mullaly’s attempts to disguise herself by using an alternate email address to the Supervisor. The Tree Warden is an extremely part time, elected position. The same individual has held the role for over 19 years. Our recent Town Meeting of October 28, 2024 passed a proposed by law, currently under review by the AGO, to appoint the tree warden. This is, of course, no matter to Mrs. Mullaly. She continues to press upon his credentials and fixate on his role and his duties. All of this animosity for her stems from an insurance claim that she was not successful in receiving funds through. The Town also attaches a spreadsheet along with its December 20th email and letter, and explains the following: Also attached is the tracking spreadsheet we keep to review all of Mrs. Mullaly’s requests. We break this out by year. In 2024, to date, she has filed 194 requests. I bring your attention to November 2024 which demonstrates an influx of requests pertaining to trees, tree removal and [a named individual] in his capacity as Tree Warden. These requests are filed in rapid succession, some on the same day as other requests. As you know, the time starts ticking once we receive it and the large amount of requests is, in the opinion of many officials, meant to intimidate, detract resources, and overload and overwhelm systems so that we forget to respond, are confused, or are in some other way held in non-compliance. Further, they involve volunteers for the community. This leads to our belief that Mrs. Mullaly intends to embarrass professionally town officials hired and elected to perform functions for the Town. Such behavior impacts negatively our ability to

Mallory E. Aronstein SPR24/3390 Page 4 December 27, 2024 retain volunteers, both elected and appointed. Volunteers for these roles are necessary to continue town services in a variety of ways. . . . This string of Public Records Requests and the switching between email addresses in an attempt once again to disguise herself is exactly harassing, intimidating and bullying behavior, targeted at one official in particular and causing duress, undo stress, and burdens to other Town Officials, including the Town Clerk, Town Accountant, Highway Superintendent, Executive Assistant, Assistant Town Administrator and Town Administrator. As showcased during the September 4 Selectmen’s Meeting, Mrs. Mullaly received, read, and understood the Supervisor’s intent and declaration in the first determination that such behavior is not in the spirit of the public records law and that the Supervisor is within her power to deny appeals based upon that foundation. Moreover, she stated clearly that she intends to continue her cycle of filing records request “as many as [she] needs to”. The mass of public records requests involving the tree warden, his duties, bylaws pertaining to his duties, and all of the insurance claim information has not only been responded to timely and in good faith by the town, but it is the complete collection of any responsive records we have. I implore the Supervisor to allow us to no longer have to respond to public records requests on this topic given the past history with Mrs. Mullaly’s voracious records requesting, the harassing and intimidating nature of behavior toward the tree-warden and insurance-claim related requests, and that she understands and has been forewarned that harassing and bullying behavior such as this is an abuse of process with the public records law. In the letter included with its December 20th email, the Town also explains the following: Ms. Mullaly’s requests are time consuming. They take me and many other officials away from our other, more pertinent duties. She has submitted numerous requests on the same subject after she has received our responses; it seems to be a tactic to harass and confuse with frivolous requests, especially when she does not agree with the response she is given. Ms. Mullaly has declared openly at a Board of Selectmen’s meeting, that this is a “personal hobby” of hers because she has nothing to do now that she does not babysit her grandchildren. This is a burden on the Town’s resources and an outright abuse of process. When Ms. Mullaly does not get the answer she wants, she reports us to the State under an appeal, further wasting resources of government officials. Based on the information provided in the Town’s petition, I find that the Town has not demonstrated that the requests are frivolous and not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, as required by G. L. c. 66, § 10(c).

Mallory E. Aronstein SPR24/3390 Page 5 December 27, 2024 Conclusion In light of the above, I cannot grant the Town’s petition seeking relief from its obligation to produce responsive records at this time. Please note, this office may deny an appeal if, in the opinion of the Supervisor of Records, the request is designed or intended to harass, intimidate, or assist in the commission of a crime. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b)(2). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Geraldine Mullaly