Geraldine Mullaly v. Swansea, Town of - Town Clerk (SPR 20250018)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records January 15, 2025 SPR25/0018 Mallory E. Aronstein Town Administrator Town of Swansea 81 Main Street Swansea, MA 02777 Dear Ms. Aronstein: I have received the petition of Geraldine Mullaly appealing the response of the Town of Swansea (Town) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On November 14, 2024, Ms. Mullaly requested the following: [C]opies of the Town’s original insurance claim providing: - pre-condition of tree(s) and - timeline for Tree Warden’s identification of diseased tree to “marking” of diseased tree to falling of diseased tree Secondly, please provide a copy of the directive, forwarded to [an individual], which caused him to include the January 6th and 7th of 2024, Snow & Ice Warning reports in the Town’s insurance claim package for claim MAEP24010734. The Town responded on December 19, 2024. Unsatisfied with the Town’s response, Ms. Mullaly petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR25/0018, 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 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 SPR25/0018 Page 2 January 15, 2025 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 Town’s December 19th Response In its December 19, 2024 response, the Town provides numerous responsive records, and provides the following explanation of the records: See below for our notes on what has already been provided to Mrs. Mullaly. Document 1 – “Mullaly Original Request” This is an assortment of emails that could constitute what Mrs. Mullaly is calling “an insurance claim”. This is how we reported it, this is the information that went with it, the insurance company handled everything else from there. Document 2 - MAEP24010734. denial letter. This document was mailed to Mrs. Mullaly by the insurance company in July 2024. We know she is in receipt of this because she has subsequently referenced the claim number found on that letter. We have confirmed that this letter was sent to Mrs. Mullaly by the Insurance Company. Document 3 – MAEP24010734. Weather Report #1 This document was previously requested by Mrs. Mullaly and sent to her on August 29, 2024. Document 4 – MAEP24010734. Weather Report #2 This document was previously requested by Mrs. Mullaly and sent to her on August 29, 2024. Document 5– MAEP24010734. Weather Report #3 This document was previously requested by Mrs. Mullaly and sent to her on August 29, 2024. Also sent on August 29, 2024 were pictures of the trees and a map of the location in question.

Mallory E. Aronstein SPR25/0018 Page 3 January 15, 2025 Current Appeal In her appeal petition, Mr. Mullaly contends that the Town possesses additional records responsive to her request. She argues, among other things, that she has not received communications between insurance company employees “and any Town Official regarding the circumstances leading to the filing of insurance claim #MAEP24010734.” She also asks that “special attention to be focused on those communications between [a list of individuals] ... to including the answers to questions asked, but not answered...” Possession, Custody, or Control; No Duty to Answer Questions, Create Documents Please be 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). Further, 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). However, under the Public Records Law, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). In its December 19th response, the Town explains that Ms. Mullaly “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.” Conclusion Where the Town confirmed that it does not possess additional records responsive to Ms. Mullaly’s request, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Geraldine Mullaly