Pashchenko, Maryna v. Boston Housing Authority (SPR 20260445)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records February 20, 2026 SPR26/0445 Dean Papademetriou, Esq. General Counsel Public Records Manager Boston Housing Authority Boston, MA 02111 Dear Attorney Papademetriou: I have received the petition of Maryna Pashchenko appealing the response of the Boston 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 November 10, 2025, Ms. Pashchenko requested the following records: [1] Copies of all inspection reports, photographs, and notes for the inspections conducted at [an identified] apartment on July 30, September 3, and October 7, 2025; [2] Any internal communications between BHA staff and [an identified] landlord . . . related to these inspections; [3] A copy of the documentation [an identified individual] personally handed to [an identified] Inspector . . . on July 30, 2025 . . .; [4] Any records explaining why the October 7 inspection was removed, is no longer visible, or was never added to the BHA database; [5] Written clarification regarding the inspection reportedly scheduled for December 10, 2025 . . .; [6] . . . [I]dentification of who approved [an identified] apartment for lease under the Section 8 program . . . with: [eight identified substandard housing conditions]. Previous Appeals This request was the subject of previous appeals. See SPR25/3454 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (December 8, 2025) and SPR25/3772 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (January 8, 2026). In my January 8th determination, I ordered the Authority to clarify whether it possesses any additional records responsive to Item 3 of the request. The Authority responded on February 4, 2026 and February 5, 2026. Unsatisfied with the Authority’s 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

Dean Papademetriou, Esq. SPR26/0445 Page 2 February 20, 2026 responses, Ms. Pashchenko petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/0445, 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 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 February 4th and February 5th Responses In its February 4, 2026 response, the Authority stated, “[a]fter further search and inquiry, the BHA states that it does not possess additional records that are responsive to Item 3 of the Requester’s Request. The BHA previously provided all the records in the BHA’s possession to the Requester on December 22, 2025 and December 30, 2025.” In its February 5, 2026 response, the Authority clarified, “the BHA sent the attached records that are responsive to Item 3 to the Requester on 12/22/2025 and 12/30/2025. The only difference is that the 12/22/2025 records were scanned in black and white and the 12/30/2025 records were scanned in color. The BHA has no additional records responsive to Item 3.” Current Appeal In her appeal petition, Ms. Pashchenko argued: [1] BHA produced zero records responsive to Item 3. [2] BHA’s “previously provided” statement is not a valid response to Item 3. [3] BHA’s supplemental response confirms an absence of responsive records (and confirms noncompliance).

Dean Papademetriou, Esq. SPR26/0445 Page 3 February 20, 2026 In a telephone conversation with this office on February 18, 2026, the Authority confirmed again that it possesses no additional records responsive to Item 3 of the request. No Duty to Create Records Please be advised, under the Public Records Law a custodian is not required to create a record in response to a public records request. See G. L. c. 66, § 6A(d). In addition, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). Further, 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). Conclusion Given that the Authority has confirmed that it possesses no additional records responsive to Item 3 of the request, and this office has no authority to compel the Authority to create records, I will consider this administrative appeal closed. If Ms. Pashchenko 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. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(b)(ix), 10A(c) (pursuing administrative appeal does not limit availability of judicial remedies). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Maryna Pashchenko