Christopher Falco v. Rockland, Town of (SPR 20253107)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records October 30, 2025 SPR25/3107 Robert W. Galvin, Esq. Land Use Counsel Town of Rockland 10 Enterprise Street, Suite 3 Duxbury MA 02332-3315 Dear Attorney Galvin: On October 23, 2205, this office received your petition on behalf of the Town of Rockland (Town) seeking relief from the obligation to produce responsive 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, I understand that the Town furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor, Christopher Falco. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On October 28, 2025, Mr. Falco requested “any and all full and complete Board of Health Records in the Town of Rockland Board of Health in regard to 30-36 Belmont Street, Rockland, MA.” I understand the Town assigned reference number 25-131 to this request. In a letter to this office on October 24, 2025, Mr. Falco objected to the Town’s petition. Petitions for an Extension of Time and Relief from the Obligation to Provide records 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 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 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

Robert W. Galvin, Esq. SPR25/3107 Page 2 October 30, 2025 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) shall provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(b). Request for Relief In its petition requesting relief from the obligation to provide records, the Town argues, among other things, the following: On October 24, 2023, Mr. Falco filed a complaint in Plymouth County Superior Court, Civil Action Number 2383CV00803 against the Town Clerk and Assistant Town Clerk for the Town of Rockland alleging five counts of Intentional Violation of the Public Records Law Mass. Gen. L. c. 66 §10 relating to appeals SPR23/0890 (Count I), SPR23/1104 (Count II); SPR23/1428 (Count III), SPR23/1709 (Count IV), and SPR23/2031 (Count V). In his complaint, Mr. Falco is seeking a determination from the Superior Court that previously requested documents that were subject to Public Records Appeals by Mr. Falco are public records, that the Town of Rockland violated the Public Records Law and order the Town to make the requested public records available, as well as other relief. (See Ex. C, Docket Sheet; Ex. D Complaint). The case is scheduled for a final trial conference on November 3, 2025, and a trial on November 10, 2025, at the Plymouth County Superior Court in Brockton, Massachusetts. (See Ex. C, Docket Sheet). On October 28, 2025, Mr. Falco, submitted a new Public Records Request #25- 131 to the Town of Rockland and its Board of Health, requesting “any and all full and complete Board of Health Records in the Town of Rockland Board of Health in regard to 30-36 Belmont Street, Rockland, MA.” (See Ex. E, Request 25-131). This request is duplicative of at least two prior requests that are also directly related to the case involving the Town of Rockland and Mr. Falco pending in Plymouth County Superior Court, Civil Action Number 2383CV00803 and are the subject of Counts IV and V of the complaint, an alleged Intentional Violation of the Public Records Law Mass. Gen. L. c. 66 of the Complaint. (See Ex. D,

Robert W. Galvin, Esq. SPR25/3107 Page 3 October 30, 2025 Complaint at pg. 10-11, Ex. E, Request 25-131). . . . Here, Mr. Falco’s October 28, 2025, Request #25-131 serves no other purpose but to disrupt and delay the Town’s ability to defend Civil Action No. 2383CV00803. The requested records are the subject of a dispute in Civil Action No. 2383CV00803, and Mr. Falco’s current request constitutes harassment and creates additional work and expenses for the Town. In nearly all cases, the Town of Rockland has provided records promptly and free of charge to Mr. Falco despite in many cases hours and hours needed to search for and gather the requested records; however, when the Town of Rockland has provided access to documents that are within its custody and control, Ms. Falco has liberally appealed those responses to your offices. These appeals add to the time and expense. Your records will show that in 2023 to date there have been at least eight appeals, five of which are subject to litigation under Civil Action number 2383CV00803. In his October 24, 2025 letter opposing the Town’s petition, Mr. Falco argues the following: The request on July 5, 2023 has to do with a Rockland restaurant, inspection reports, an emailed complaint and a subsequent investigation report concerning that restaurant. The current request on October 25, 2025 has to do with records of a multi-family building. Not only is the request not in litigation as the Town claims but its also not a duplicative request the requests are seeking completely different types of records and records of completely different addresses and one is a restaurant and one is a multi-family building. . . . The Town further contends that this request is harassment and is somehow alleging that this is some sort of punishment for their previous behavior. They further state they are perpetual state of responsiveness and these requests are somehow designed to intimidate or harass. All while admitting and writing that the last appeal was in August of 22, 2023 and the current one was filed October 25, 2025. That is 2 years and 2 months apart from each other. They are also completely different requests entirely. This is hardly the definition of harassment or intimidation. Pending 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.

Robert W. Galvin, Esq. SPR25/3107 Page 4 October 30, 2025 This office has reviewed the docket of the trial court and verified that the requested records are the subject of active and ongoing litigation in Plymouth County Superior Court. See Christopher Falco v. Liza Landy, et al, (Plymouth Superior Court Docket No. 2383-CV-00803) (October 23, 2025). In light of the pending litigation, 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). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Christopher Falco