Maskell, Lisa v. Quincy, City of - Office of the City Clerk (SPR 20260983)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 1, 2026 SPR26/0983 Brenda G. Fernandez Public Records Coordinator City of Quincy Office of the City Clerk 1305 Hancock Street Quincy, MA 02169 Dear Ms. Fernandez: I have received the petition of Lisa Maskell appealing the response of the City of Quincy (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On February 19, 2026, Ms. Maskell requested, “[c]opies of records sufficient to identify the regulatory instrument governing resale pricing of [an identified location], Quincy, MA. Specifically, please provide: [1] The HOME Investment Partnerships Program written agreement or funding agreement applicable to [an identified location][;] [2] Any recorded regulatory agreement, HOME affordability covenant, land use restriction agreement (LURA), declaration of restrictions, or similar instrument governing resale of 74 Bower Road[;] [3] Any recorded document releasing, subordinating, amending, or otherwise modifying the resale restriction referenced in: Book 13121 Page 524; Book 13967 Page 309; Book 42778 Page 4[;] [4] The resale price calculation worksheet or methodology supporting the current $385,000 listing price[.] The City responded on February 27, 2026. Unsatisfied with the response, Ms. Maskell petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/0983, 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

Brenda G. Fernandez SPR26/0983 Page 2 April 1, 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 February 27th Response In its February 27, 2026 response, the City stated, [1] … The City does not possess any responsive documents. [2] … The City does not possess any additional responsive documents beyond those produced, to the extent that they may be applicable. [3] … The City does not possess any additional responsive documents beyond those produced, to the extent that they may be applicable. [4] … The City does not possess any additional responsive documents beyond those produced, to the extent that they may be applicable The City further stated, “I am in receipt of your third Public Record Request (each a “PRR”) with regard to the above private Property received on February 19, 2026 (the previous PRRs responded to were received 12/15/25 and 2/3/26). Please be advised that, per your request, the City shall not be producing any documents that have been previously produced to you in response to your 2 prior PRRs[.] Current Appeal In her appeal, Ms. Maskell states, “I am appealing the City of Quincy’s response to my request for records.” In a telephone call between a Public Records Division Attorney and a representative of the City on March 19, 2026, the City confirmed that it does not possess records responsive to Ms. Maskell’s request.

Brenda G. Fernandez SPR26/0983 Page 3 April 1, 2026 No Duty to Create Records 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 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). Conclusion Where the City confirmed that it does not possess any additional records responsive to Ms. Maskell’s request, and has no duty to create records responsive to the request, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. If Ms. Maskell 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: Lisa Maskell