Carlos Castillo v. Framingham, City of - City Clerk (SPR 20251951)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records July 11, 2025 SPR25/1951 Paul J. Iversen Records Access Officer City of Framingham 150 Concord Street Framingham, MA 01702 Dear Mr. Iversen: On July 7, 2025, this office received your petition on behalf of the City of Framingham (City) seeking an extension of time to produce 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, it is my understanding that the City furnished a copy of the petition to the requestor, Carlos Castillo. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On June 26, 2025, Mr. Castillo requested “[r]esults of health inspections conducted in Framingham in the last 6 months. I am also hoping you can provide business licenses for any businesses that serve food in Framingham ‐ hospitals, churches, synagogue, day cares, schools, restaurants, assisted living facility. Also, can I please [get] a report on any new business license filed since January 1, 2025.” Petition for an Extension of Time 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 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

Paul J. Iversen SPR25/1951 Page 2 July 11, 2025 (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) must provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 36.06(4)(b). Current Petition In its petition, the City requests “an extension of 30 days to respond to request 2025- 2032, received by the Health Department on June 26, 2025” and provides the following information in support of its request: [T]he Health Department is currently understaffed and also has people out on vacation. The processing of just the permit portion of this request will take approximately 10 hours to complete, as there are more than 300 food establishments in the City. Each permit must be exported out of Accela and saved into a file, each one taking about 2 minutes without interruption. The extension of time is necessary to ensure both the timely completion of the request and the normal functioning of the Health Department. In light of the need to collect, segregate and examine the records, as well as the capacity of the City to produce the records without an extension, the City has established good cause to permit an extension of time. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c)(i)-(iii). The City is granted an extension of 30 business days. Conclusion As described above, I find that the City has established good cause for a time extension of 30 business days. Please note, Mr. Castillo has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the appropriate superior court. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(c), 10(d)(iv)(4), 10A(c).

Paul J. Iversen SPR25/1951 Page 3 July 11, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Carlos Castillo