Teague, Charles v. Cambridge, City of - Office of the City Clerk (SPR 20260499)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records February 26, 2026 SPR26/0499 Seah Levy Public Records Access Officer City of Cambridge 795 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02139 Dear Ms. Levy: I have received the petition of Charles Teague appealing the response of the City of Cambridge (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On December 29, 2025, Mr. Teague requested the following documents: … all documents including but not limited to all applications and plans (everything from formal architectural drawings to informal sketches), communications (including but not limited to emails and letters) about the redevelopment of 96 Jackson Street, Cambridge MA 02140 starting from Jan 1 2025 to the present day for all city departments including but not limited to Inspectional Services, Public Works, Water, Fire, Transportation (formerly Traffic, Parking & Transportation) and Community Development. The City responded on February 4, 2026. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Teague petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/0499, 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. Att’y for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian has the 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

Seah Levy SPR26/0499 Page 2 February 26, 2026 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 February 4th Response In its February 4, 2026 response, the City stated, “[d]ue to the complexity of searching for the requested documents the City hereby identifies a reasonable timeframe to complete this request your request of 25 business days from the date of receipt of your request, pursuant to G.L. c. 66 §10(b)(vi). However, the City will provide these records on a rolling basis, as quickly as possible. At this time, please find responsive records regarding Excavation Permit as well as Demolition Permit 1183122 uploaded to your account on the Public Records Center as well as linked from this email.” Current appeal In his appeal Mr. Teague states, “[t]he City employed a strategy of delay, redundant production requiring the requestor’s review, and false declaration of completeness. However, the underlying issue for the public and your office is the City’s general policy of keeping permit application documents from the public until after a permit is granted. This is not allowed by the Public Records Law.” 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 an agency, the timeframe shall not exceed 15 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records and 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. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi).

Seah Levy SPR26/0499 Page 3 February 26, 2026 Where Mr. Teague’s request was originally submitted on December 29, 2025, and the City has not provided the outstanding responsive records, I find the City has not met its burden in responding to the request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Accordingly, I find the City must provide an estimated date as to when it expects to complete its review and provide the remaining 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 to provide Mr. Teague with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with 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. Teague may appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Charles Teague