Stanley Mazurczyk v. Chelmsford, Town of - Town Clerk (SPR 20252140)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records July 30, 2025 SPR25/2140 Patricia Dzuris Town Clerk Town of Chelmsford 50 Billerica Road Chelmsford, MA 01824 Dear Ms. Dzuris: I have received the petition of Stanley Mazurczyk appealing the response of the Town of Chelmsford (Town) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On July 10, 2025, Mr. Mazurczyk provided the Town with a document and made the following request: Attached document, Town of Chelmsford, Warrant for the 2024 Fall Annual Town Meeting, dated October 21, 2024 is based on having provided Town representatives records they needed to formulate their votes. This request is for those records, Town representatives received and when, hard copy or electronic format, before they voted as they did on October 21, 2024. The Town responded on July 17, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Town’s response, Mr. Mazurczyk petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2140, 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

Patricia Dzuris SPR25/2140 Page 2 July 30, 2025 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. 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 Town’s July 17th Response In its July 17, 2025 response, the Town provided responsive records and a corresponding access link and stated, “[t]he link below is the online folder with the 2024 Fall Town Meeting documents. This link was provided in advance to the Town Meeting Representatives via the attached notice mailed to each representative on September 16, 2024… Printed copies were available to pick up at the Town Offices, and they were provided at the Information Session and at Town Meeting.” Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Mazurczyk stated, “[the] Town’s response is incomplete (nonresponsive) and appears to be evasive… Please compel the Town [to] provide requested records without further delay.” In a telephone conversation between the Town and this office on July 21, 2025, the Town confirmed that all responsive records were provided to Mr. Mazurczyk. No Duty to Create Records Please be advised, under the Public Records Law a custodian is not required to create a record in response to a public records request. See G. L. c. 66, § 6A(d). In addition, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). Further, 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). Conclusion Given that the Town has confirmed that it possesses no additional records responsive to Mr. Mazurczyk’s request, and this office has no authority to compel the Town to create records, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. If Mr. Mazurczyk is not satisfied with the resolution of this administrative appeal, please be advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A(c) (pursuing administrative appeal does not limit availability of applicable judicial remedies).

Patricia Dzuris SPR25/2140 Page 3 July 30, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Stanley Mazurczyk