Foster, Catherine v. Adams, Town of - Town Clerk (SPR 20261217)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 16, 2026 SPR26/1217 Haley Meczywor Town Clerk Town of Adams 8 Park Street, Suite 110 Adams, MA 01220 Dear Ms. Meczywor: I have received the petition of Catherine Foster appealing the response of the Town of Adams (Town) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On November 10, 2025, Ms. Foster requested “all documents that reflect” the following: [1] The reason(s) [an identified individual] was placed on administrative leave; [2] The nature and status of any related investigations, internal or external; and [3] Any communications, including but not limited to emails, memoranda, text messages, letters or notes, between town officials, staff, or counsel pertaining to the leave or investigation. Previous Appeals This request was the subject of previous appeals. See SPR25/3753 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (January 6, 2026) and SPR26/0695 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (March 12, 2026). In my March 12th determination, I ordered the Town to clarify its application of Exemption (c) and Exemption (f) to the withheld records. The Town responded on March 26, 2026. Unsatisfied by the response, Ms. Foster petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/1217, 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 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

Haley Mecsywor SPR26/1217 Page 2 April 16, 2026 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. See 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 March 26th Response In its March 26, 2026 response, the Town withheld all records in its custody citing Exemption (c) and Exemption (f) of the Public Records Law. See G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c), (f). Additionally, the Town stated the following: Additionally, your initial request did not seek the general information outlined in your second appeal, including “Basic employment information, dates of administrative actions, and the existence and status of investigations…” Instead, it requested documents detailing far more specific and personal aspects of [an identified individual’s] employment. At the time of the request, the Town had no produceable documents in its possession meeting the specifications of your request. Current Appeal In her April 2, 2026 petition to this office, Ms. Foster argues, “[a]lthough the Town was ordered to provide a response consistent with the Public Records Law and [the Supervisor’s] determination, it continues to withhold nearly all responsive records and has not cured the deficiencies identified in your decision…” Pending Litigation 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b) provides in pertinent part: the Supervisor may deny an appeal for, among other reasons if, in the opinion of the Supervisor: 1. the public records in question are the subjects of disputes in active litigation, administrative hearings or mediation.

Haley Mecsywor SPR26/1217 Page 3 April 16, 2026 In an April 3, 2026 conversation between the Town and an attorney of the Public Records Division, the Town confirmed that the pending litigation is ongoing. This office has reviewed the trial court’s docket and verified that criminal litigation, relating to the records at issue in Ms. Foster’s request, is active and ongoing in the Berkshire Superior Court. See Commonwealth v. Kevin Scott Kelley (Berkshire Superior Court, Docket No. 2676CR00046). In light of the pending litigation, I decline to opine on this matter at this time. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b). It should be noted that a change in the status of this action could impact the applicability of 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Catherine Foster Holli Jayko