Peter Hoffman v. Berlin, Town of - Board of Selectmen (SPR 20250827)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records March 27, 2025 SPR25/0827 Dee Green Assistant to the Town Administrator Town of Berlin 23 Linden Street Berlin, MA 01503 Dear Ms. Green: I have received the petition of Peter Hoffman appealing the response of the Town of Berlin (Town) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On February 25, 2025, Mr. Hoffman requested: [1.] Electronic (scan and then email) copies of public records that are known as ‘minutes’ for open (or public) meetings of the Board of Assessors (BOA) on Jan 27, 2025 and Feb 24, 2025. [2.] Copies of all BOA invoices and related to invoice documents (e.g. cover letter) from all attorneys, law firms and paralegals consulting to and or representing the BOA for the calendar years 2023 and 2024[.] On March 11, 2025, the Town provided a response. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Hoffman petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/0827, 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. 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

Dee Green SPR25/0827 Page 2 March 27, 2025 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 March 11th Response In its March 11, 2025 response, the Town provided Mr. Hoffman with records responsive to Item 1 of his request. The Town further informed Mr. Hoffman that it possessed invoices responsive to Item 2 of his request. The Town estimated that redacting the responsive records would require two hours of staff time, at a rate of $150.00 per hour, stating “[t]he documents will be provided to you in pdf format within two weeks of the Town’s receipt of your assent to the proposed charges.” Current Appeal In his March 26, 2025 petition to this office, Mr. Hoffman objected to the Town’s “… request that [he] agree to make payment of $300 for the records requested.” In an email communication to this office on March 27, 2025, the Town clarified that “… the Town was not requesting payment from Mr. Hoffman. Rather, asking for his acknowledgment of the cost to the Town. The Town intends to compensate its legal counsel for the necessary redaction process.” The Town confirmed that it was not assessing a fee for the production of responsive records. Where the Town has confirmed that it is not assessing a fee for the production of responsive records, I find that no violation of G. L. c. 66, § 10 has been asserted by Mr. Hoffman in the appeal petition. Conclusion In compliance with the Public Records Law, the Supervisor of Records may only issue determinations where a violation of G. L. c. 66, § 10 has occurred. G. L. c. 66, § 10A(a). Given that no violation of G. L. c. 66, § 10 has been asserted by Mr. Hoffman in the appeal petition, I am unable to issue a determination at this time. If Mr. Hoffman is not satisfied with the resolution of this administrative appeal, please be advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth. See G. L. c. 66, § l0A(c).

Dee Green SPR25/0827 Page 3 March 27, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Peter Hoffman