Brian Foley v. Boston, City of - Public Records (SPR 20251786)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records July 3, 2025 SPR25/1786 Grace Jung Director of Public Records City of Boston 1 City Hall Square, Room 615 Boston, MA 02201 Dear Ms. Jung: I have received the petition of Brian D. Foley, Esq., of O’Connor & O’Connor, PC, appealing the response of the City of Boston (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On May 27, 2025, Attorney Foley requested, “. . . a list of attendance for the Eliot School for the 2024-2025 for K0, K1, and K2, by zip code. In other words, you may withhold all identifying criteria of students except for the zip code for those in attendance at the Eliot for 2024-2025 school year.” The City provided a response on June 17, 2025, which included a responsive record. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Attorney Foley petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/1786, was opened as a result. While this appeal was pending, the City provide a supplemental response on June 23, 2025. 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. Att’y 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 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

Grace Jung SPR25/1786 Page 2 July 3, 2025 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 June 17th and June 23rd Responses In its June 17, 2025 response, the City provided one responsive record and advised, “[t]he records responsive to this request have been released to the Public Records Center.” The City further provided a link to its Records Center and stated, “click the link . . . to log in[.]” In its June 23, 2025 supplemental response, a representative for the City advised, “I have alerted representatives from the department regarding this matter in an effort to resolve any outstanding issues regarding your public records request. I will provide an update to you once additional information is provided to me by the department.” In an email replying to the City dated June 24, 2025, Attorney Foley objected to the City’s supplemental response. Current appeal In his appeal, Attorney Foley asserts, “[m]y request was for a list of attendance at a Boston Public School - the Eliot School in the North End - and the City has refused to comply.” He further states, “[t]he City took 25 business days to respond to this . . . request and when they did reply they sent me a non-responsive document. They sent me a list outlining zip codes and percentages that do not make any sense with respect to my request. . . . Nothing in the attached document is responsive to my request.” Timeliness in providing records G. L. c. 66, § 10(b) provides, in pertinent part, that if the magnitude or difficulty of the 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 an agency, the timeframe shall not exceed 15 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records and 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).

Grace Jung SPR25/1786 Page 3 July 3, 2025 Where Attorney Foley submitted his request on May 27, 2025, and the City has not yet provided all responsive records, I find the City has not met its burden in responding to this request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)–(b) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the City must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Attorney Foley with a response to 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: Brian D. Foley, Esq.