Colman Herman v. Everett, City of - Office of the City Clerk (SPR 20250940)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 22, 2025 SPR25/0940 Colleen M. Mejia, Esq. Office of the City Solicitor City of Everett 484 Broadway, Room 21 Everett, MA 02149 Dear Attorney Mejia: I have received the petition of Colman Herman 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 24, 2025, Mr. Herman requested the following: [1] Records of any and all expenses that [an identified individual] incurred in his capacity as mayor of the City of Everett for the period January 1, 2024 to December 31, 2024. This includes the following, [a] Expense reports, including back-up receipts[;] [b] Credit cards statements, including back-up receipts[;] [c] Automobile expense records, including back-up receipts[;] [d] Any and all other records that document [an identified individual’s] expenses, including back-up receipts[;] Please note that I am seeking both source documents and a spreadsheet or summary of the expenses. [2] The written employee reimbursement policy of the City of Everett. The City provided a response on April 1, 2025. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Mr. Herman petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/0940, 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 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

Colleen M. Mejia, Esq. SPR25/0940 Page 2 April 22, 2025 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 April 1st Response In its April 1, 2025 response, the City and provided 17 responsive records as attachments and stated, “[w]e have completed the work in reference to your request . . . . In case such separate response documents exist, they are represented by attachments to this response email.” Additionally, the City advised, “[b]etween [the] Request Response and attachments, we believe you are receiving a comprehensive response to your request.” Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Herman asserts, “the City of Everett produced . . . responsive records, each one apparently in the form of an excerpt from a bank statement, and nothing more — no expense reports, no credit card statements, no automobile expense records.” He further contends, “[t]he question becomes how did [an identified individual] get reimbursed for his expenses if none of these records exist?” Additional Records Based on Mr. Herman’s claim, as described above, it is unclear whether the City possesses additional records responsive to the request. If the City does possess additional responsive records, it must either provide the records, or cite an exemption to the Public Records Law, and explain with specificity how such an exemption applies to withhold or redact the records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv). 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). The City must clarify this matter. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Mr. Herman with a response to his request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations

Colleen M. Mejia, Esq. SPR25/0940 Page 3 April 22, 2025 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. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Colman Herman