Bryant, Patrick v. Boston, City of (SPR 20261183)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 8, 2026 SPR26/1183 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 Patrick N. Bryant, Esq., of Pyle Rome Ehrenberg PC, appealing the responses of the City of Boston (City) to two requests for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On January 23, 2026, Attorney Bryant made the following requests: Request 1 A list of all Boston fire fighters hired pursuant to the hybrid/local register process in the past six months. The number of Boston fire fighters hired pursuant to the hybrid/local register process in the past six months, including breakdown by gender/sex, race, veterans status, and cadet status. It is my understanding that the City assigned this request reference number R000357- 012326. Request 2 Number of cadets hired in 2024 and 2025, as broken down by race, gender/sex, language proficiency and veterans status. It is my understanding that the City assigned this request reference number R000358- 012326. The City responded to Request 1 on February 9, 2026 and to Request 2 on February 10, 2026. Unsatisfied with the City’s responses, Attorney Bryant petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/1183, was opened as a result. 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 SPR26/1183 Page 2 April 8, 2026 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 City’s February 9th and February 10th Responses In response to Request 1 on February 9, 2026, the City stated, “[d]ue to the nature of your request, additional time is needed. As such the City will need up to, but no more than fifteen (15) additional business days to review and process your request.” In response to Request 2 on February 10, 2026, the City provided records responsive to the request. Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Attorney Bryant stated that he “received no substantive response” to Request 1. Regarding Request 2, Attorney Bryant argued that the City “omitted information requested that has been provided before” from the responsive records, and argued that the City failed to respond to a follow-up inquiry seeking “information on race or veterans status of cadets.” 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

Grace Jung SPR26/1183 Page 3 April 8, 2026 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). Where Request 1 was submitted on January 23, 2026, and the City has not provided responsive records, nor cited an exemption for withholding 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 requested 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. Additional Records Regarding Request 2, based on the information provided in the appeal petition and the City’s response, it is unclear whether the City possesses any additional records responsive to the request. Specifically, the City must clarify whether it possesses any records reflecting “information on race or veterans status of cadets,” which Attorney Bryant claims has been omitted from the records provided. 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). Custodians are expected to use their superior knowledge of the records in their custody to assist the requestor in obtaining the desired information. See 950 C.M.R. 32.04(5). The City must clarify this matter. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Attorney Bryant with a response to the requests 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. Attorney Bryant may appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1).

Grace Jung SPR26/1183 Page 4 April 8, 2026 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Patrick N. Bryant, Esq. Ruby Theriot