Olufunmilola Shelly v. Framingham, City of - City Clerk (SPR 20252989)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records October 21, 2025 SPR25/2989 Paul J. Iverson Records Access Officer City of Framingham 150 Concord Street Framingham, MA 01702 Dear Mr. Iverson: I have received the petition of Olufunmilola Shelly appealing the response of the City of Framingham (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66 § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On September 2, 2025, Ms. Shelly requested, “[c]omplaints filed against [an identified] Chief Operating Officer from date of hire to present [and] [a]ll gender discrimination complaints filed from 2021 to present.” The City provided a response on October 7, 2025. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Ms. Shelly petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2989, 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. See 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

Paul J. Iverson SPR25/2989 Page 2 October 21, 2025 If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. See 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 October 7th Response In its October 7, 2025 response, the City provided responsive records and stated, “[t]wo complaints have been withheld, as they are the subjects of disputes in active litigation and administrative hearings.” Current Appeal In her October 10, 2025 appeal to this office, Ms. Shelly stated, “…two responsive complaints were withheld on the stated basis that they are ‘the subjects of disputes in active litigation and administrative hearings.’ The City’s rationale is legally insufficient…The outcome of pending cases cannot alter, retroactively redact, or nullify the existence or substance of those original complaints…” Active Litigation 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b) provides in pertinent part: the Supervisor may deny an appeal for, among other reasons if, in the opinion of the Supervisor: 1. the public records in question are the subjects of disputes in active litigation, administrative hearings or mediation. In an email communication from the City to this office on October 20, 2025, the City confirmed that an administrative proceeding relating to one of the withheld records at issue in Ms. Shelly’s request is currently pending before the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD). Hagerty v. City of Framingham See (MCAD Docket No. 23WEM01517). Additionally, the City confirmed that one of the withheld records at issue is the subject of active and ongoing litigation in the United States District Court. Mahoney v. City of Framingham, et al. See (U.S. Dist. Ct. Docket No. 1:25-cv-11504). In light of the active litigation and administrative proceeding, I decline to opine on this matter at this time. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b). Please note that a change in the status of this action could impact the applicability of 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b).

Paul J. Iverson SPR25/2989 Page 3 October 21, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Olufunmilola Shelly