MA Public Records Search
← Back to Search

Herman, Colman v. Massachusetts Housing Partnership (SPR 20261112)

Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Public records appeal decision · Filed 03-25-2026

ClosedAppeal

SPR 20261112 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Herman, Colman concerning records held by Massachusetts Housing Partnership, opened 03-25-2026. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed.

Case Details

Case Number
20261112
Case Type
Appeal
Status
Closed
Requester
Herman, Colman
Custodian
Massachusetts Housing Partnership
Date Opened
03-25-2026
Date Closed
04-08-2026

PDF Document

Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 8, 2026 SPR26/1112 Jameel Moore, Esq. Senior Counsel Massachusetts Housing Partnership 160 Federal Street Boston, MA 02110 Dear Attorney Moore: I have received the petition of Colman Herman, appealing the response of the Massachusetts Housing Partnership (Partnership/MHP) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On March 1, 2026, Mr. Herman requested “...a copy of your contract [for an identified individual]. This includes copies of any and all amendments.” The Partnership responded on March 3, 2026. Unsatisfied with the Partnership’s response, Mr. Herman petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/1112, 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. 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

Jameel Moore, Esq. SPR26/1112 Page 2 April 8, 2026 Current Appeal In his appeal, Mr. Herman asserts, “[i]t is inconceivable that the Massachusetts Housing Partnership, a state government agency, would issue an “Employment and Severance Agreement” and not mention, for example, how much Mr. Ziegler is to be paid.” Partnership’s March 3rd Response In its March 3, 2026 response, the Partnership produced one responsive document captioned “Employment and Severance Agreement without redactions and stated, “MHP is in receipt of your public records request dated March 1, 2026, requesting a copy of [an identified individual’s] contract and all amendments. Attached please find the document responsive to your request.” The Partnership further stated on March 3, 2026, “[t]he document we provided is the only record we have that is responsive to your request. There are no additional contracts or amendment.” Based on Mr. Herman’s claims, in conjunction with the Partnership’s response, it is unclear if the Partnership possesses any additional records responsive to his request. 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). However, 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). Consequently, the Partnership must clarify whether any additional responsive records exist. Conclusion Accordingly, the Partnership is ordered to provide Mr. Herman with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten 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. Herman may appeal the substantive nature of the Partnership’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Colman Herman