Tina Murray v. Boston, City of - Public Records (SPR 20251931)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records July 14, 2025 SPR25/1931 Grace Jung Records Access Officer City of Boston 1 City Hall Square, Room 615 Boston, MA 02201 Dear Ms. Jung: I have received the petition of Tina Murray, of North Point Associates, 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 June 6, 2025, Ms. Murray sought, “[a]ll attendance records/ timesheets or other records for all employees of the City of Boston Office of Neighborhood Services for the following dates: March 31, 2025-April 4, 2025; April 21, 2025-April 30, 2025.” The City responded on June 6 and June 23, 2025. Unsatisfied with the responses, Ms. Murray petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/1931, 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. 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 SPR25/1931 Page 2 July 14, 2025 If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. See 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 6th and June 23rd Responses In its June 6, 2025 response, the City assigned the request reference number R002898- 060625. In its June 23, 2025 response, the City stated, “[t]he records responsive to this request have been released to the Public Records Center.” Current Appeal In her July 1, 2025 petition to this office, Ms. Murray stated, “[a]fter review of the records, I discovered records for two employees…were not provided. On June 24, 2025, I sent an email asking the City [to] provide the missing records. I have not yet received a response or acknowledgment in response to my June 24 email.” Based on Ms. Murray’s petition and the City’s response, it is unclear whether the City possesses additional responsive records. 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). Consequently, the City must clarify whether it possesses additional responsive records described in Ms. Murray’s appeal petition. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Ms. Murray with a response to the 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. Ms. Murray may appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Tina Murray