Collin Dias v. Fall River, City of - Office of the City Clerk (SPR 20251710)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records June 17, 2025 SPR25/1710 Gary P. Howayeck, Esq. Assistant Corporation Counsel City of Fall River One Government Center Fall River, MA 02722 Dear Attorney Howayeck: On June 13, 2025, this office received your petition on behalf of the City of Fall River (City) seeking an extension of time to produce records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). As required by law, it is my understanding that the City furnished a copy of the petition to the requestor, Collin Dias. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On June 4, 2025, Mr. Dias requested the following: [1] All emails to and from Interim CFO [identified individual] with the following key words: School School [sic] Department NSS Net School Spending DESE End of Year Report Superintendent School Committee[;] [2] All emails to and from Interim CFO [identified individual] and any email domain that ends with @fallriverschools.org... [including] all records within the years 2024 and 2025. Petition for an Extension of Time 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: (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; 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

Gary P. Howayeck, Esq. SPR25/1710 Page 2 June 17, 2025 (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) must provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 36.06(4)(b). Current Petition In its petition, the City requests “an extension of an additional 30 business days to respond in full, as permitted for municipalities under M.G.L. c. 66, § 10(c)” and provides the following information in support of its request: [G]iven the volume, scope, and anticipated need for legal and administrative review, a response within the standard statutory timeframe is not feasible. [T]his request is extremely broad and, based on our preliminary review, likely to yield a substantial volume of responsive records. Specifically, the request encompasses two full calendar years of email communications for a key municipal official, using a wide array of keywords. Satisfying this request will require detailed electronic searches, followed by a record-by-record review to identify non-responsive materials and apply necessary legal redactions under the public records exemptions outlined in M.G.L. c. 4, § 7(26), including exemptions concerning personal privacy, internal deliberations, and privileged communications. In an email to this Division on June 16, 2025, Mr. Dias objects to the City’s petition for an extension of time, arguing “[t]he public records request I have made is not broad whatsoever, it is narrow, it lists specific records I am looking for via key words and specific emails, the request has specific dates which only go back a roughly a year and a half, and I completely deny that city’s assertion that this request is broad and extensive. The request cannot be lowered in scope to achieve my objective. This request is within the public interest for expeditious disclosure.”

Gary P. Howayeck, Esq. SPR25/1710 Page 3 June 17, 2025 In light of the need to collect, segregate and examine the records, as well as the capacity of the City to produce the records without an extension, the City has established good cause to permit an extension of time. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c)(i)-(iii). The City is granted an extension of 30 business days. Conclusion As described above, I find that the City has established good cause for a time extension of 30 business days. Please note, Mr. Dias has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the appropriate superior court. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(c), 10(d)(iv)(4), 10A(c). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Collin Dias