Nikolas Reny v. Arlington, Town of - Clerk's Office (SPR 20251744)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records July 1, 2025 SPR25/1744 Christine Bongiorno Deputy Town Manager of Operations Records Access Officer Town of Arlington 730 Massachusetts Avenue Arlington, MA 02476 Dear Ms. Bongiorno: I have received the petition of Nikolas Reny appealing the response of the Town of Arlington (Town) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On April 28, 2025, Mr. Reny submitted the following questions concerning “Lake street in Arlington”: [1] Initial Reasoning and Origin of the Signage: [a] What prompted the installation of this time-restricted signage? [b] Was it based on resident requests, traffic volume data, safety concerns, or other criteria? [2] Traffic Calming Alternatives: [a] Was the use of speed bumps or other traffic calming methods considered? [b] If so, could you share the rationale behind opting for signage instead? [3] Hazard Data and Review Documentation: [a] How many traffic-related hazards (e.g., accidents, near misses, speeding complaints) occurred on these streets that contributed to the decision? [b] Are there any studies, reports, meeting notes, or other documentation available that detail the review process and findings? The Town responded on May 1, 2025, which included responsive records. Following further correspondence, on May 20, 2025, Mr. Reny modified his request to the following: [1] Clarification on the 90-Day Restriction: The documents provided mention a 90-day restriction on the signage, but it has now been in place for nearly over 40 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

Christine Bongiorno SPR25/1744 Page 2 July 1, 2025 years. Could you clarify how and why this restriction was extended beyond its original timeframe? [2] Contact Information for the Engineer’s Office and Select Board: In my previous correspondence, I requested contact information for both the Engineer’s Office and the Select Board to further investigate this matter. I kindly ask that you provide these details or direct me to the appropriate individuals. The Town provided a response on May 20, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Town’s response, Mr. Reny petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/1744, 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. 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 May 20th Response In its May 20, 2025 response, regarding Item 2 of Mr. Reny’s May 20th request, a representative of the Town advised, “I would . . . suggest you contact the Engineers office and the Select Board office to determine who you should talk to there. Which is also not a record [the Town] has in its possession.” The Town representative further provided a phone number and indicated that it was where, “[t]he main switchboard in town can be reached at . . . .” Current appeal In his appeal, Mr. Reny states, “I’m appealing that this team has deflected, denied, and unprofessionally threw me around in circles.” He additionally notes, “I’ve taken a lot of time out of my days to get this information . . . . I suspect the town of Arlington is following and adhering to outdated and maladministrative [sic] policies which I have noted to various teams/ departments. I am requesting public information to prove this case.”

Christine Bongiorno SPR25/1744 Page 3 July 1, 2025 Records in Existence; No Duty to Answer Questions 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). 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 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). Upon review, where Mr. Reny submitted to the Town a question in Item 1 of his May 20, 2025 request, I find the Town has no duty under the Public Records Law to answer such a question. Consequently, I find that the portion of Mr. Reny’s appeal regarding Item 1 of the request is resolved. Further, based on the Town’s response, coupled with Mr. Reny’s claims above, it is unclear whether the Town possesses additional records responsive to Item 2 of his request. If the Town 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) (a written response must “identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based”). The Town must clarify this matter. Conclusion Accordingly, the Town is ordered to provide Mr. Reny with a response to Item 2 of his 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. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Nikolas Reny