Jacquelyn Wehtje v. Fitchburg, City of - City Clerk (SPR 20252249)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records August 13, 2025 SPR25/2249 Joanna Bilotta-Simeone City Clerk City of Fitchburg 718 Main Street Fitchburg, MA 01420 Dear Ms. Bilotta-Simeone: I have received the petition of Jacquelyn Wehtje appealing the response of the City of Fitchburg (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On July 31, 2025, Ms. Wehtje requested, “all marriage records in the city database from 7/1/24 to 6/30/25 with the keywords . . . in the Officiant field. I am only interested in this particular field in the electronic record and do not need details on the people getting married.” The City responded on August 1, 2025. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Ms. Wehtje petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR25/2249, 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. If there are any fees associated with a response, a written good faith estimate must be 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

Joanna Bilotta-Simeone SPR25/2249 Page 2 August 13, 2025 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 August 1st Response In its August 1, 2025 response, the City stated, “no responsive databases that exist or are in the possession of the City of Fitchburg that meet the criteria described in your request/ question.” Current Appeal In her appeal petition, Ms. Wehtje stated, “I find it difficult to believe that you keep these records only in hard copy rather than in a database, given that they must be transmitted to the state Registry of Vital Records and Statistics. It is common for records requests to use keywords. The City of Fitchburg itself has utilized keywords in fulfilling records requests in the past.” No Duty to Create Records Please note that 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). Further, under the Public Records Law, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). However, in accordance with the Public Records Law, 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). In a telephone call between a staff attorney of the Public Records Division and the City on August 7, 2025, the City confirmed that it has no records responsive to Ms. Wehtje’s request. Conclusion Where the City confirmed that it does not possess records responsive to Ms. Wehtje’s request, and has no duty to create records responsive to the request, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. If Ms. Wehtje 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. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(b)(ix), 10A(c) (pursuing administrative appeal does not limit availability of judicial remedies).

Joanna Bilotta-Simeone SPR25/2249 Page 3 August 13, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Jacquelyn Wehtje