Meghan Perry v. Nantucket, Town of (SPR 20251351)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records May 27, 2025 SPR25/1351 Maureen Coleman Public Records Compliance Officer Town of Nantucket 16 Broad Street Nantucket, MA 02554 Dear Ms. Coleman: I have received the petition of Meghan Perry appealing the response of the Town of Nantucket (Town) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On February 25, 2025, Ms. Perry requested, “. . . all communication between [six identified individuals] from 2018 to September 2023[.] Including but not limited to all emails that mention [an identified individual].” On March 7, 2025, Ms. Perry modified her request to include, “. . . [a] 2021-23 timeframe Fire inspection or fire inspections.” The Town responded on February 26, February 28, March 6, March 7, April 4 and April 16, 2025. Unsatisfied with the responses, Ms. Perry petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/1351, 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. 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

Maureen Coleman SPR25/1351 Page 2 May 27, 2025 If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. See 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 Responses In its February 26, 2025 response, the Town stated: After consulting with IT, your records search request is actually four separate searches: [1] Town emails From/To/CC/ [for five identified individuals][;] [2] Fire Department emails From/To/CC [two identified individuals][;] [3] Town emails From/To/CC [for four identified individuals] which mention [an identified individual] (and variations)[;] [4] Fire Department emails From/To/CC [for four identified individuals] which mention [an identified individual] (and variations)[.] Given the five-year time frame of four searches, we will provide a fee estimate for search, review and redaction to recover costs of complying with a voluminous public records request. If you would like to modify or add specificity to your request to narrow search results, please let me know. In its February 28, 2025 response, the Town stated: Request TON-81-2025 is challenging. IT has spent four hours on #4 and anticipates another two hours before it can be exported to me for refinement. They are working with 16,000+ emails during that five-year period using the provided names. Could you further clarify what you’re looking for and narrow the date range? The search has captured Maira Mitchell Association mentions, Chamber of Commerce calendars with MMA, the Current and Google Alerts adding to unnecessary processing time. We are open to suggestions. In its March 6, 2025 response, the Town stated, “[i]n addition to my [February 28, 2025] note, the Fire Department server has 1005 emails for processing.” In its March 7, 2025 response, the Town stated, “[i]n the email from February 26, it states the same list IT used and found 16,000 emails with time frame, 2018 through September 2023. Now are you adding ‘Fire Inspections or fire inspection” or is that a search topic? Are you looking for Fire Inspections from 2018 through September 2023?”

Maureen Coleman SPR25/1351 Page 3 May 27, 2025 In its April 4, 2025 response, the Town stated, “I should have [the documents] at the beginning of next week.” In its April 16, 2025 response, the Town stated, “I [am] waiting for my computer to finish ‘syncing’ so I can send a continuous feed document with your requested emails. Look in your inbox tomorrow for an email from Sharepoint Online and use your email to open the folder.” Current Appeal In a May 1, 2025 mail to the Town, Ms. Perry states, “I’m just following up on this request. The documents I received only go till February 2022 not the entire year. Could you please double check with IT and ask them to send along the entire year[’s] [w]orth? Or am I somehow missing something?” In her May 14, 2025 petition to this office, Ms. Perry stated, “I am appealing my public records request to your office. Could someone in your office please help me receive the public records that I have requested from the town of Nantucket?” Timeframe for Providing Records G. L. c. 66, § 10(b) provides, in pertinent part, that if the magnitude or difficulty of a 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 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 Ms. Perry submitted her modified request on March 7, 2025, and the Town has not provided responsive records, nor cited an exemption for withholding records, I find the Town has not met its burden in responding to the request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b). Consequently, the Town must provide an estimated date as to when it intends to complete the search and provide the outstanding responsive records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the Town must provide responsive records on a rolling basis.

Maureen Coleman SPR25/1351 Page 4 May 27, 2025 Conclusion Accordingly, the Town is ordered to provide Ms. Perry 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. Ms. Perry may appeal the substantive nature of the Town’s response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Meghan Perry