Brian McCarter v. Boston, City of - Public Records (SPR 20251828)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records July 9, 2025 SPR25/1828 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 McCarter 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 December 24, 2024, Mr. McCarter requested, “all fiancials [sic] statements, projections or any documents that indicate the cost of operation of the blue bike program in the city of Boston. 2022, 2023 and 2024.” Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR25/1537 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (June 13, 2025). In my June 13th determination, I ordered the City to provide an estimated date as to when it intended to complete the search and provide any responsive records. Subsequently, the City responded on June 20 2025, which included a responsive record. Unsatisfied with the City’s June 20th response, Mr. McCarter petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/1828, 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. 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 SPR25/1828 Page 2 July 9, 2025 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 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 20th Response In its June 20, 2025 response, the City provided one responsive record through its Public Records Center and advised that it “does not directly cover Bluebikes operations costs.” The City further indicated, “[t]he system operator is paid through a revenue-sharing agreement, receiving title sponsorship and user revenues, and sharing a portion back with the City. The City covers some operations expenses, such as station relocation and subsidized memberships, but most municipal spending goes toward capital equipment.” Current appeal In his appeal, Mr. McCarter contends that “[t]he City’s June 20, 2025 response is both untimely and substantively deficient” and notes, “[t]he single spreadsheet provided does not satisfy either the scope of my original request or the requirements outlined in [the Supervisor’s] order under SPR25/1537.” Mr. McCarter additionally requests that the Supervisor “. . . order the City to produce all responsive records in full[.]” Based on Mr. McCarter’s claims, in conjunction with the City’s response, it is unclear if the City possesses any additional records responsive to the request. 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). However, 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). Consequently, the City must clarify whether additional records exist. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Mr. McCarter 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. Mr. McCarter may appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1).

Grace Jung SPR25/1828 Page 3 July 9, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Brian McCarter