Brady, Michael v. Boston, City of - Public Records (SPR 20261118)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records March 30, 2026 SPR26/1118 Grace Jung Director of Public Records City of Boston 1 City Hall Square, Room 615 Boston, MA 02201 Dear Ms. Jung: I have received the petition of Michael Brady appealing the response of the City of Boston (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On October 15, 2025, Mr. Brady requested: …all records related to the installation and subsequent removal of speed humps on Allandale Street, Boston, MA, conducted in January and February 2025 as part of the City’s “Safety Surge” traffic-calming initiative. Specifically, I am requesting: [1] All purchase orders, invoices, and vendor bills associated with the procurement, installation, and removal of the Allandale Street speed humps[;] [2] All work orders, job tickets, or internal crew logs documenting City labor or contractor labor related to this work[;] [3] Any emails, memos, or reports generated by the Boston Transportation Department, Public Works Department, or Chief of Streets Office that discuss the cost, scope, or decision-making related to the installation or removal of these speed humps[;] [4] Any contracts or task orders (including change orders) issued to any vendor or contractor for this work. On October 22, 2025, Mr. Brady modified his request to: [1] Records of payment, invoices, purchase orders, or work orders issued by the Boston Transportation Department or Public Works Department for the installation of speed humps on Allendale Street between December 1, 2024, and February 1, 2025. 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

Grace Jung SPR26/1118 Page 2 March 30, 2026 [2] Records of payment, invoices, purchase orders, or work orders related to the removal of those same speed humps between February 1, 2025, and March 31, 2025. [3] Any internal emails or memoranda between staff within BTD and/or Public Works that specifically reference both “Allendale Street” and “speed humps” during the same date ranges listed above. On November 20, 2025, Mr. Brady further modified his request to: [1] Records of payment, invoices, purchase orders, or work orders issued by the Boston Transportation Department or Public Works Department for the installation of speed humps on Allendale Street between December 1, 2024, and February 1, 2025. [2] Records of payment, invoices, purchase orders, or work orders related to the removal of those same speed humps between February 1, 2025, and March 31, 2025. Previous Appeal The requested records were the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR26/0311 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (February 10, 2026). In my February 10th determination, I ordered the City to provide Mr. Brady with a response to his request. The City responded on March 23, 2026. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Mr. Brady petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/1118, 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.

Grace Jung SPR26/1118 Page 3 March 30, 2026 The City’s March 23rd Response On March 23, 2026, the City provided one responsive record and stated, “[t]he record reflects the payment estimates for all projects in the zone in which Allandale is located, with the cost for the removal of speedhumps highlighted. The Public Records team consulted with both the Boston Transportation Department and the Public Works Department to locate potential responsive records. Both departments confirmed that there are no responsive records for work orders, record of payment, or invoices. The responsive record is the only record that exists relating to your request.” Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Brady contends, “[t]he City produced a document titled ‘Estimate for Payment – Special Draft,’ which appears to summarize anticipated costs associated with the installation and removal of speed humps on Allandale Street… . However, this document does not include the categories of records specifically requested, including invoices, purchase orders, records of payment, or work orders.” Additional 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). Based on issues raised in Mr. Brady’s appeal, it is unclear whether the City possesses additional responsive records. Specifically, the City must clarify whether it possesses “invoices, purchase orders, records of payment, or work orders.” To the extent that additional records exist, I find the City must provide them in a manner consistent with the Public Records Law or identify an exemption that applies to withhold the records from disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b). The City must clarify this matter. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Mr. Brady with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, 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. Brady may further appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1).

Grace Jung SPR26/1118 Page 4 March 30, 2026 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Michael Brady