Vozzelli, Mary v. Quincy, City of - Office of the City Clerk (SPR 20261377)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 24, 2026 SPR26/1377 Brenda G. Fernandez Public Records Coordinator City of Quincy 1305 Hancock Street Quincy, MA 02169 Dear Ms. Fernandez: I have received the petition of Mary Vozzelli appealing the response of the City of Quincy (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On March 26, 2026, Ms. Vozzelli requested the following related to “all taxpayer funds spent on the two saint statues commissioned with public money”: [1] Commission records for both statues, including all payments made. Including change orders to Suffolk adding these statues after the fact. That 2% additional expenditure is associated with this. . .project[;] [2] All records regarding shipping, transportation, and storage of the statues – including any contract with storage facilities, all invoices, and all monthly fees incurred to date [and] what will be paid each month forward. . .[;] [3] All legal fees the city incurred in connection with this matter – including attorney invoices, hourly rates, and total amounts paid to date by the [C]ity or the Solicitor’s Office, both prior to and following any pro bono arrangement with outside counsel. Even where outside counsel . . . is working pro bono, city staff time and Solicitor resources represent a real cost to taxpayers. . .[;] [4] Any security costs associated with the statues while in storage. The City provided responses on March 16, 2026 and March 30, 2026. Unsatisfied with the City’s responses, Ms. Vozzelli petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/1377, 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

Brenda G. Fernandez SPR26/1377 Page 2 April 24, 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. See 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 City’s March 16th and March 30th Responses In its March 16, 2026 response, the City acknowledged receipt of the request. In its March 30 response, a representative for the City stated, “I have sent to the City Solicitor for a response.” Current Appeal In her April 13, 2026 appeal to this office, Ms. Vozzelli stated, “[t]he request reached the correct records officer . . . on March 16, 2026, and she shared a response deadline of March 26, 2026. That deadline passed without a response . . . As of April 13, no records have been produced, no exemption has been cited, and no explanation for the delay has been offered. This request relates to Claire Fitzmarice & other v. City of Quincy currently a case before the MA SJC with oral arguments scheduled for May 6, 2026. . .” 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.

Brenda G. Fernandez SPR26/1377 Page 3 April 24, 2026 This office has reviewed the trial court’s docket and verified that civil litigation, relating to the records at issue in Ms. Vozzelli’s request, is active and ongoing in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. See Claire Fitzmaurice & Other v. City of Qunicy & Another, (Supreme Judicial Court, SJC-13877). In light of the pending matter, 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: Mary Vozzelli