Ferretti, Alec v. Reading, Town of - Town Clerk (SPR 20260135)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records January 28, 2026 SPR26/0135 Laura A. Gemme Town Clerk Town of Reading 16 Lowell Street Reading, MA 01867 Dear Ms. Gemme: I have received the petition of Alec Ferretti appealing the response of the Town of Reading (Town) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On August 27, 2025, Mr. Ferretti requested “…a scan of the birth certificate/return of a birth for [two identified individuals].” Previous Appeals This request was the subject of previous appeals. See SPR25/2553 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (September 9, 2025); SPR25/2673 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (September 23, 2025); SPR25/2996 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (October 15, 2025); and SPR25/3180 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (November 12, 2025). In my November 12th determination, I found it was unclear whether the Town is able to provide Mr. Ferretti with the records responsive to his request and ordered it to provide the responsive records or identify an exemption that applies to withhold them from disclosure. The Town responded on December 23, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Town’s response, Mr. Ferretti petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/0135, was opened as a result. While this appeal was pending, the Town provided a further response on January 13, 2026. 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). 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

Laura A. Gemme SPR26/0135 Page 2 January 28, 2026 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 Town’s December 23rd and January 13th Responses In its December 23, 2025 response, the Town stated: The Town of Reading will be sticking with the original response. We have provided the same copy, with same information for anyone requesting a certified copy of a birth record. Which according to the Department of Public Health – Vitals we should not have done. We will not be providing a scanned copy, we will not be exposing these old records to light and causing them damage. All information as requested has been provided. The Town is only allowed to provide certified copies of birth certificates. Anything else requested for vital records falls within Exemption A. In its January 13, 2026 response, in support of its previous responses, a Town official argued: I have provided the record to the requestor as I would to anyone requesting a certified copy of the record… I am not providing as scanned copy of the record to anyone weather [sic] the[y] pay for the record or not. I have given this requestor the information requested… If the Vital Records division of the Department of Health specifically tells me in writing that I can give a scanned copy of a vital record, I will comply. Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Ferretti argued, “[t]he defense brought up by the [Town] is neither an exemption under the Public Records Law, nor a concern to professional arc[h]ivists.” Referred to the Office of the Attorney General The subject matter and the issues raised in Mr. Ferretti’s appeal, as well as the Town’s responses, are similar to those addressed in SPR25/2684 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (September 23, 2025) and SPR25/2814 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (October 2, 2025). Please note that on January 21, 2026, I referred these matters to the Office of

Laura A. Gemme SPR26/0135 Page 3 January 28, 2026 the Attorney General (AGO) for enforcement. In light of this referral sent to the AGO, I decline to provide a determination as to the public status of the requested records at this time pending a resolution to the AGO’s review. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b). Conclusion Accordingly, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. If Mr. Ferretti is not satisfied with the resolution of this administrative appeal, please be advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A(c) (pursuing administrative appeal does not limit availability of applicable judicial remedies). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Alec Ferretti