Lavey v. Somerville Housing Authority (SPR 20253590)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records December 17, 2025 SPR25/3590 Emily Eschmann Records Access Officer Somerville Housing Authority 30 Memorial Road Somerville, MA 02145 Dear Ms. Eschmann: I have received the petition of Lavey (requestor) appealing the nonresponse of the Somerville Housing Authority (Authority) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On October 21, 2025, the requestor sought “. . . all records involving an [identified] individual . . . (applicant or tenant). . . .” Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR25/3438 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (December 4, 2025). In my December 4th determination, I closed SPR25/3438 in light of the Authority providing written responses to the requestor on November 20, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Authority’s responses, the requestor petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR25/3590, 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 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

Emily Eschmann SPR25/3590 Page 2 December 17, 2025 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. The Authority’s November 20th Responses In its initial November 20, 2025 response, a representative for the Authority advised that they “have no record of an email request dated October 21, 2025, requesting [an identified individual’s] documentation, nor have I received a hardcopy of such a request mailed to my address . . . in Somerville.” The Authority representative further explained, “in order to protect [an identified individual’s] privacy, [the individual’s] written permission is required before any information can be released. Once that authorization is received, I will proceed with gathering the requested records.” Following correspondence from the requestor on the same date, the Authority provided an additional response on November 20, 2025. Here, the Authority representative reiterated that the Authority did not receive the requestor’s above October 21, 2025 request and noted, “however, I did receive [the] request today.” The Authority representative further denied the request, in its entirety, and stated, “the records you are seeking are not accessible, as they are either privileged or contain confidential/private information that cannot be released without proper authorization.” Current Appeal In the December 5, 2025 appeal, the requestor “[requests] the Supervisor to order the Authority to disclose the responsive records in accordance with the public records law.” Burden of Specificity The Authority is advised that, under the Public Records Law, the burden shall be on the custodian to establish the applicability of an exemption to withhold or redact records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv) (a written response must “identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based”). See also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Police Comm’r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); Flatley, 419 Mass. at 511; Reinstein v. Police Comm’r of Boston, 378 Mass. 281, 289-90 (1979) (the statutory exemptions are narrowly construed and are not blanket in nature). Any nonexempt, segregable portion of a public record is subject to mandatory disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § 10(a). Consequently, the Authority’s response did not contain the specificity required in a denial of access to public records. The Authority did not identify the records in its possession that it

Emily Eschmann SPR25/3590 Page 3 December 17, 2025 intends to withhold from disclosure, nor cited an exemption for withholding or redacting the responsive records. The Authority must clarify these matters. Conclusion Accordingly, the Authority is ordered to provide the requestor 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. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Lavey