Dawn Priest v. Townsend, Town of (SPR 20252258)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records August 12, 2025 SPR25/2258 Harrison C. Mayotte Town Clerk Town of Townsend 272 Main Street Townsend, MA 01469 Dear Mr. Mayotte: I have received the petition of Dawn Priest appealing the response of the Town of Townsend (Town) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On July 28, 2025, Ms. Priest requested, “the ‘more than 100 times’ that I made references to [an identified individual] with incorrect information that [an identified individual] has referenced [in an identified document].” The Town responded on August 1, 2025, assigning the request reference number 2025-0284. Unsatisfied with the Town’s response, Ms. Priest petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2258, 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

Harrison C. Mayotte SPR25/2258 Page 2 August 12, 2025 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 August 1st Response In its August 1, 2025 response, the Town provided a responsive record authored by the identified individual in the subject request, documenting and tallying over 100 online posts and comments made by Ms. Priest. Current Appeal In her appeal petition, Ms. Priest stated, “…the information provided is not the information requested.” In an email to this office on August 3, 2025, Ms. Priest provided the following supplemental information: As part of her response [to a separate public records request], [an identified individual] included a narrative which claimed that I misrepresented her in her role as HR director more than 100 times on social media. As this is a false allegation, I requested evidence of her claim. She has failed to provide any evidence that I have misrepresented anything to do with her, or her position, and instead only provided content as to my opinion on whether the position should be kept in the budget process. Additionally, she claims I misrepresented her once on a website that I created for informing the town, but it should be noted that I do not own any websites and she is once again falsely accusing me. Unclear Appeal Please be advised that the Office of the Supervisor of Records is statutorily empowered with the authority to determine the public record status of government records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10. Further, in compliance with the Public Records Law, the Supervisor of Records may only issue determinations where a violation of G. L. c. 66, § 10 has occurred. G. L. c. 66, § 10A (a). Given that no violation of G. L. c. 66, § 10 has been asserted by Ms. Priest, I find that the basis of Ms. Priest’s appeal is unclear. Ms. Priest is advised that all petitions for appeal “shall specifically describe the nature of the requestor’s objections to the response or failure to timely respond.” 950 C.M.R. 32.08(l)(f). Conclusion Accordingly, I will consider this administrative appeal closed.

Harrison C. Mayotte SPR25/2258 Page 3 August 12, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Dawn Priest