Stoff, David v. Somerville, City of (SPR 20260023)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records January 20, 2026 SPR26/0023 Cindy Amara, Esq. City Solicitor City of Somerville 93 Highland Ave Somerville, MA 02143 Dear Attorney Amara: I have received the petition of David Stoff appealing the response of the City of Somerville (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On October 14, 2025, Mr. Stoff requested: … any records the City of Somerville may have about flows in a cross connection between the Somerville and Cambridge sewer systems in North Cambridge. Relevant records would include metering data, or data used to estimate the volume of the wastewater flow. Engineering studies and plans in the possession of the City or its consultants, as well as relevant meeting notes and emails, that describe the cross connection are included in the scope of this request. The City responded on October 28, 2025 and November 5, 2025. Unsatisfied with the City’s responses, Mr. Stoff petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/0023, 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. 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

Cindy Amara, Esq. SPR26/0023 Page 2 January 20, 2026 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 October 28th and November 5th Responses On October 28, 2025, the City stated: On behalf of the City of Somerville Records Access Officer, this will confirm our office has received your email dated and received on 10/14/2025. Due to the magnitude of your request and the resources required to provide a complete response, the city will provide you with a supplemental response and provide you with the public records sought within 25 business days from the date of the receipt of your request. The city has identified records and intends to produce same, and may redact or withhold records if any exemptions are identified under the Massachusetts Public Records Law or any other statutes. Any exemptions will be set out in the City’s supplemental response to you. On November 5, 2025, the City stated, “[o]n behalf of the Records Access Officer and the Records Custodians, I have been informed the City of Somerville has no records responsive to your request.” Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Stoff contends: The City has responsive records because it routinely uses computer modeling as a tool to quantify and predict flows in its sewer system. An example of a relevant record in Somerville’s possession that is responsive to the Public Records Request comes from the September 4, 2025 meeting, noted above. At the meeting participants were given a handout for the slide presentation reading: [Alewife Brook] Alternatives Limited CSOs in 2050 [Typical Year] #7 Hybrid Alternative 1 CAM001 Disconnect the Clarendon Connection 1

Cindy Amara, Esq. SPR26/0023 Page 3 January 20, 2026 The meeting included a discussion of how results from the Unified Sewer System Model (“Unified Model”) created by Somerville, Cambridge, and the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority for use in the Long-Term CSO Control Plan for Alewife Brook, indicated that discharges of untreated sewage to Alewife Brook could be mitigated by an alternative that closed the Clarendon Street cross connection. Data generated by the Unified Model about flows in the Clarendon Street cross conection, [sic] presented at the meeting on September 4, 2025, satisfies the Public Records Request of October 14, 2025. Records in Existence 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). Under the Public Records Law, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). In accordance with the Public Records Law, 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). In this case, based on the City’s responses, and the information provided in the requestor’s appeal petition, it is unclear whether the City possesses records responsive to the request. If the City does possess responsive records, it must either provide the records, or cite an exemption to the Public Records Law, and explain with specificity how such an exemption applies to withhold or redact the 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”). Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Mr. Stoff 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. Mr. Stoff may further appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1).

Cindy Amara, Esq. SPR26/0023 Page 4 January 20, 2026 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: David Stoff