Podlesny, Nathan v. Amherst, Town of - Office of the Town Clerk (SPR 20261191)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 13, 2026 SPR26/1191 Amber Martin Records Access Officer Town of Amherst 4 Boltwood Avenue Amherst, MA 01002 Dear Ms. Martin: I have received the petition of Nathan Podlesny appealing the response of the Town of Amherst (Town) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On January 19, 2026, Mr. Podlesny requested, “[t]he signal timing charts and controller event logs for the intersection of University Drive and Amity Street… I require the logs for December 5, 2025, specifically between the hours of 130pm and 230pm.” The Town responded on February 10, 2026. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Podlesny petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/1191, was opened as a result. The Town provided a supplemental response on April 3, 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. 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

Amber Martin SPR26/1191 Page 2 April 13, 2026 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 Town’s February 27th and April 3rd Responses In its February 10, 2026 response, the Town stated, “[t]here are no logs of the traffic light in question. We may have the light timing sequence written down some where but the controller does not keep a log.” In its April 3, 2026 supplemental response, the Town stated, “[w]e do not have the timing written down. We need to create the document unless they want to send a person out to do it. I might have sent [an identified individual] to write it down, I will check.” Current Appeal In his appeal, Mr. Podlesny states, “[t]o date, my numerous email and phone inquiries have gone unreturned.” 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). In an email correspondence between a Public Records Division attorney and a representative of the Town on April 13, 2026, the Town confirmed that it does not possess records responsive to Mr. Podlesny’s request. Conclusion Where the Town confirmed that it does not possess records responsive to Mr. Podlesny’s request, and has no duty to create records responsive to the request, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. If Mr. Podlesny 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).

Amber Martin SPR26/1191 Page 3 April 13, 2026 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Lisa Maskell