Jennifer Morais v. Hudson, Town of (SPR 20252870)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records October 10, 2025 SPR25/2870 Joan M. Wordell Town Clerk Town of Hudson 78 Main Street Hudson, MA 01749 Dear Ms. Wordell: I have received the petition of Jennifer Morais appealing the response of the Town of Hudson (Town) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On September 26, 2025, Ms. Morais requested: [C]opies of any public records related to [an identified individual’s] permit application for [an identified street address] (conversion to a child care facility)… 1. Emails, memoranda, notes, or reports that mention “[an identified street address]”, “daycare”, “child care”, or [an identified name] in connection with the application. 2. Communications among the Building Commissioner, Planning Board, Planning Department, Town Manager, Select Board, or other staff/consultants regarding zoning, site plan review, parking, plumbing, fire code, or building code determinations for this project. 3. Any staff checklists, review comments, or draft materials related to my application. Subsequently, on September 29, 2025, Ms. Morais modified her request to include the following records: [A]ll internal communications (including ESI) about this project from January 14, 2025 to present as follows: Custodians (including staff/consultants): 1. Building Department: [an identified individual], former Building 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

Joan M. Wordell SPR25/2870 Page 2 October 10, 2025 Commissioner [an identified individual], plan reviewers. 2. Planning: [an identified individual], Planning Board (incl. [an identified individual]), Planning staff/consultants 3. Town Administration: Town Manager [an identified individual], Select Board members (incl. [an identified individual]), Town Counsel/Municipal Counsel 4. Public Safety: Fire Chief, Deputy Fire Inspector, Police Chief 5. Any other employees/consultants who communicated about [an identified street address.] Records sought: 1. Emails (inbox/sent/archives), internal memos/notes, meeting notes, drafts (with non-exempt portions released) 2. Text/iMessage and app messages (e.g., WhatsApp/Signal/Teams/Slack) used for town business, even on personal devices/accounts 3. Calendar entries/invites, attachments (checklists, markups, diagrams), and available metadata (sender, recipients, date/time, subject, file names)[.] The Town provided multiple responses on September 30, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Town’s responses, Ms. Morais petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2870, was opened as a result. Subsequent to the opening of this appeal, the Town provided a further response on October 2, 2025. 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. Att’y 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.

Joan M. Wordell SPR25/2870 Page 3 October 10, 2025 The Town’s September 30th Responses In its initial September 30, 2025 response, the Town informed Ms. Morais that records would be sent on or by October 15, 2025. Subsequently on September 30, 2025, the Town stated that “all the emails, attachments and documents from the building department in hardcopy” were available for Ms. Morais to pick up at its offices. The Town further stated that “[a]pplications on OpenGov can be accessed by you[;] all the information for permits are available in this location and can be printed by you[.]” In a third response on September 30, 2025, the Town informed Ms. Morais that her request would be forwarded to the “proper department,” and that the Department would “print out the information from Opengov and the email will be in PDF form[.]” The Town further stated that “office phone messages are not recorded.” In a fourth response on September 30, 2025, the Town provided Ms. Morais with responsive records, and stated that it had produced all records regarding “site plan review.” The Town reiterated that phone conversations were not recorded, and stated that it possessed no responsive calendar entries. Current Appeal In her appeal, Ms. Morais states “[t]he Town’s response is incomplete. While I was directed to OpenGov materials and certain hard copies, the internal communications and electronically stored information (ESI) that fall squarely within the scope of my request have not been searched for or produced.” In its October 2, 2025 response, the Town stated that it had “… emailed all the Board members, and other departments with this request and [was] awaiting a response … The public records request is not complete and will be by October 14, 2025 and October 15, 2025 or a letter will be sent to ask for more time.” Based on the information provided in Ms. Morais’ appeal petition and the Town’s response, it is unclear whether the Town possesses additional records responsive to Ms. Morais’ request. 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). Additionally, 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). Consequently, the Town must clarify whether it possesses additional responsive records. The Town is advised that a records access officer must, to the extent feasible, provide public records to a requestor in electronic format unless the record is not available in electronic form or the requestor does not have the ability to receive or access the records in electronic format and if feasible, in the requestor’s preferred format. In the absence of a preferred format,

Joan M. Wordell SPR25/2870 Page 4 October 10, 2025 the records must be provided in a searchable machine-readable form. See 950 C.M.R. 32.04(5)(d). Conclusion Accordingly, the Town is ordered to provide Ms. Morais with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten (10) business days. A copy of any such response must be provided to this office. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of the response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Ms. Morais may appeal the substantive nature of the Town’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Jennifer Morais