Geoff Beach, Jeffrey Fishman v. Acton, Town of - Town Clerk (SPR 20251755)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records June 26, 2025 SPR25/1755 Leo Mercado Records Access Officer Town of Acton 472 Main Street Acton, MA 01720 Dear Leo Mercado: On June 18, 2025, this office received the petition of Attorney Nina Pickering-Cook, on behalf of the Town of Acton (Town) seeking relief from the obligation to produce responsive records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). As required by law, I understand that the Town furnished a copy of this petition to the requestors, Geoff Beach and Jeffrey Fishman. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). From January 1, 2025 through June 18, 2025, Mr. Beach and Mr. Fishman submitted a total of eleven requests for public records to the Town. In its petition, the Town lists the requests by the Town’s reference numbers, and by SPR numbers where the requests have been appealed to this office. The Town provides the following table listing the requests: 25-19 25-36 25-55 25-60 25-63 25-77 25-78 25-84 25-98 25-107 25-118 SPR24/241 SPR25/434 SPR25/506 SPR25/756 SPR25/951 SPR25/1082 Please note that the Town submitted its petition on June 18, 2025, more than ten business days after receipt of the original request for the six requests which were previously appealed to this office, and more than ten business days after those determination letters were issued. Additionally, the Town submitted its petition more than ten business days after initial receipt of the request for 25-98, received from Mr. Beach on May 8, 2025. Further, with the exception of 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

Leo Mercado SPR25/1755 Page 2 June 26, 2025 reference number 25-118, further discussed below, it is unclear from the Town’s petition what dates the other requests were received by the Town. In light of the fact that the Town has not demonstrated it submitted a timely petition, relief from the obligation to provide responsive records cannot be granted. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(d). Petitions for an Extension of Time and Relief from the Obligation to Provide Records 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; (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) shall provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(b). The Current Request In its petition, the Town states the following: Each of these requests are directly related to the subject of the 3 cases with the Town, i.e., concerns with the permitting of subdivisions along High Street in Acton. At this point, the Town has responded to each of the requests and appeals listed

Leo Mercado SPR25/1755 Page 3 June 26, 2025 above, except for one (1) request received from Mr. Beach on May 8 (25-98) and one (1) appeal SPR25-1082 and one (1) request received from Mr. Fishman on June 17 (25-118). The Town does not intend to respond to the open requests listed above or any additional requests received from Mr. Beach or Mr. Fishman concerning similar subject matter pending the outcome of this petition and unless specifically ordered to do so by the Supervisor’s Office. With regard to the “request received from Mr. Fishman on June 17 (25-118),” based on the information provided in the Town’s petition, I find that the Town has not demonstrated that this request is frivolous and not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, as required by G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). Consequently, relief from the obligation to provide records in response to this request cannot be granted. The Town is further advised that the Supervisor of Records lacks the authority to relieve records custodians from the obligation of responding to prospective requests. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(c) (“If the supervisor of records 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 of records may grant a longer extension or relieve the agency or municipality of its obligation to provide copies of the records sought.”(emphasis added)). Conclusion Accordingly, I am unable to grant the Town’s request for relief from the obligation to provide records in response to the “request received from Mr. Fishman on June 17 (25-118).” Further, as discussed above, where the Town has not demonstrated it submitted a timely petition for the remaining requests, I am unable to grant the Town’s request for relief from the obligation to produce records responsive to those requests. Please be aware, this office may deny an appeal if, in the opinion of the Supervisor of Records, the requested records are the subjects of disputes in active litigation. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b)(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Geoff Beach Jeffrey Fishman Nina Pickering-Cook, Esq.