Matthew J. Koes, Esq. v. Worcester, City of (SPR 20253744)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records January 2, 2026 SPR25/3744 Alexandra H. Kalkounis, Esq. City Solicitor City of Worcester 455 Main Street Worcester, MA 01609 Dear Attorney Kalkounis: I have received the petition of Matthew J. Koes, Esq., of M. Koes Law LLC, appealing the response of the City of Worcester (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On November 5, 2025, Attorney Koes requested: With respect to a lawsuit review related to IA2020-15 involving [an identified individual] (opened December 6, 2022 and closed August 18, 2023), we request the following information: [1] [T]he identity of the “independent counsel” who conducted the review of the evidence in the lawsuit; [2] [A] list of the documents reviewed by the “independent counsel”; [3] [A] list of the individuals interviewed by the “independent counsel”; and [4] [T]he amount of compensation, if any, paid to the “independent counsel.” The City responded on November 5, 2025 and November 21, 2025, and assigned reference number W079679-110525 to this request. Unsatisfied with the City’s responses, Attorney Koes petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3744, 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 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

Alexandra H. Kalkounis, Esq. SPR25/3744 Page 2 January 2, 2026 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 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 City’s November 5th and November 21st Responses On November 5, 2025, the City stated, “[y]our request has been received by City of Worcester and is being processed in accordance with the Massachusetts Public Records Law. Your request was created on 11/5/2025 and given the reference number W079679-110525 for tracking purposes.” On November 21, 2025, the City stated, “[t]he city is in need of more time, up to an additional 15 business days, to complete your request.” Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Attorney Koes states, “[m]ore than 15 business days have elapsed, and the request remains unfulfilled.” Timeliness in Providing Records G. L. c. 66, § 10(b) provides, in pertinent part, that if the magnitude or difficulty of the request unduly burdens the other responsibilities of the agency or municipality such that the agency or municipality cannot provide records within 10 business days, the agency or municipality must inform the requestor in writing within 10 business days. With respect to the timeframe to produce responsive records, the written response shall: identify a reasonable timeframe in which the agency or municipality shall produce the public records sought; provided, that . . . for a municipality the timeframe shall not exceed 25 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records; and provided further, that the requestor may voluntarily agree to a response date beyond the timeframes set forth herein.

Alexandra H. Kalkounis, Esq. SPR25/3744 Page 3 January 2, 2026 G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Where Attorney Koes submitted his request on November 5, 2025, and the City has not provided responsive records, nor cited an exemption for withholding records, I find the City has not met its burden in responding to the request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b). Consequently, the City must provide an estimated date as to when it intends to complete the search and provide the responsive records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the City must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Attorney Koes 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. Attorney Koes may further appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Matthew J. Koes, Esq.