Brian McCarter v. Massachusetts Technology Collaborative (SPR 20252719)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records September 16, 2025 SPR25/2719 Jennifer M. Saubermann, Esq. General Counsel & Director of Government Affairs Massachusetts Technology Collaborative 2 Center Plaza, Suite 200 Boston, MA 02108 Dear Attorney Saubermann: On September 15, 2025, this office received your petition on behalf of the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative (Collaborative) 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 Collaborative furnished a copy of the petition to the requestor, Brian McCarter. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On August 29, 2025, Mr. McCarter requested the following records: [1] The full grant applications for BEAD BOB round now that it’s no longer predecisional and been submitted to ntia/published on your website[;] [2] All records showing how grant amounts were calculated, including underlying data, formulas, or assumptions used, and any existing internal calculations used to determine funding[;] [3] It is difficult to determine from the posted materials whether the grant amounts cover only BSLs or also include CAIs. Please provide any already existing records that clarify this point. To avoid part 3 being overly broad, you may prioritize shorter, easier-to- release documents that directly clarify this issue. 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 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

Jennifer M. Saubermann, Esq. SPR25/2719 Page 2 September 16, 2025 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 (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 Collaborative requests “an extension of time to furnish copies of the requested records in the amount of five business days, such that the request will be due by September 22, 2025” and provides the following information in support of its request: [M]assTech provided a response to request #2 and #3, above on Thursday, September 11, 2025, at which time we requested an extension from Mr. McCarter to provide all files related to request #1 (full grant applications for BEAD BOB round). Mr. McCarter has not responded to our request for an extension. [M]assTech received 11 applications for the “BEAD BOB round” referenced above. Seven of the applications contain multiple files – between 20 to 85 per applicant, with a total of 500 files downloaded from our application portal. I have almost completed a manual review to determine whether the files contain information that is exempt from disclosure. Thus far I have determined that there are a number of files that require redaction, and others that are exempt from disclosure, but that require a written explanation of why they are exempt.

Jennifer M. Saubermann, Esq. SPR25/2719 Page 3 September 16, 2025 [T]he proposed extension is warranted because the magnitude of the request will unduly burden the other responsibilities of MassTech such that we are unable to complete our production by the statutory deadline. As detailed above, the request has produced 500 documents. Given the large volume of records MassTech must review and redact, this will impose a significant burden on staff, which will have to devote its limited resources to produce the records for this request. In an email to this Division on September 15, 2025, Mr. McCarter responded to the Collaborative’s petition, “[G]iven that MassTech has generally been timely in its records responses, [I] do not contest this five-day extension. The information is time-sensitive given the tight federal BEAD deadlines, and while it would be in the public’s interest to release it sooner, [I] will not oppose this short extension.” Conclusion In light of the Collaborative’s petition and Mr. McCarter’s September 15th email, I find it is unnecessary to opine on the Collaborative’s extension request because it intends to provide responsive records within twenty five (25) business days of the receipt of the request as allowed in G. L. c. 66 § l0(b)(vi). The Collaborative is advised it must seek another petition for extension if it cannot provide responsive records within twenty five (25) business days of the receipt of the request. G. L. c. 66 § l0(c). The records must be provided in a manner consistent with the Public Records Law and its Access Regulations. Mr. McCarter may appeal the substantive nature of the Collaborative’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Please note, Mr. McCarter 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(d)(iv)(4),10A(c). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Brian McCarter