Freedom of information: Towns claim harassment
By
Susan Spencer
Telegram & Gazette Staff
Posted Oct 28, 2017 at 7:00 PM
Updated Oct 29, 2017 at 12:47 PM
In Uxbridge, more than a third of the roughly 60 public records
requests received by the town clerk in the past year have come from one
requester.
In Hubbardston, a single requester has racked up 38 percent of the records requests.
Both towns petitioned the supervisor of records in the secretary of state’s office earlier this year to be relieved of the requirement to provide requested documents and videotapes. One of the updates to the state Public Records Law, which went into effect Jan. 1, allows for exceptions on the grounds that requests are frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality.
The towns’ petitions arguing harassment were denied.
Two weeks ago, state Supervisor of Records Rebecca S. Murray issued the first granting of a request from a town to ignore public records requests from a citizen because of harassment.
In that case, Ms. Murray agreed with Wellesley’s petition that a recent request from resident Ronald Alexander, who had filed more than 200 public records requests since 2013, was at best “frivolous,” as town officials argued. Mr. Alexander had requested all of the 190 public records requests since 2013, most of which had been filed by him.
The Massachusetts Public Records Law gives people the right to access, in a reasonable manner and electronically if possible, documents and materials of the workings of state and local government. The law outlines deadlines, allowable fees and processes for appeals and exemption requests.
SMALL-TOWN BURDEN
Some local officials feel that, while the law’s intentions are noble, the burden of carrying out certain public records requests can be a lot to bear for communities with little staff and tight budgets.
“I’m probably spending half of my week on public records,” said Uxbridge Town Clerk Kelly J. Dumas.
Uxbridge town meeting voters approved last week a transfer of an additional $40,000, nearly 50 percent more than what was approved in the fiscal 2018 budget in May, into the legal services account, in part to pay for additional public records costs.
Town Manager David A. Genereux said that Town Hall doesn’t have its own information technology staff, so to pull hundreds or thousands of emails dating back decades costs $95 an hour paid to a contractor.
Material that is exempt from having to be released in public records must then be reviewed and, if necessary, redacted, for which town counsel charges $175 an hour.
The bulk of the Uxbridge requests this year, and the subject of the town’s claim of harassment, have come from resident Patrick J. Hannon, who operates two soil-importation projects in town and served until July on the Conservation Commission.
Mr. Hannon denied in an email that his requests have in any way been attempts to harass or intimidate town officials or employees.
Mr. Hannon filed 20 formal records requests, and his wife, Sofia Gagua, filed one request, between Nov. 14, 2016, and Oct. 4, according to the town clerk’s records log. There were 59 records requests from all sources logged for that time.
The Nov. 14 request for all emails sent or received by the
administrative assistant for the Planning Board and Zoning Board of
Appeals, followed by a Nov. 16 request for all emails sent or received
by the health agent and Board of Health administrative assistant, took
10 hours and cost more than $1,000 to provide.
According to Ms. Dumas, it took two bulk paper boxes to contain the documents. “We scanned it before it went out because the size of it was immense,” she said.
Michael Morrissette, chairman of the Uxbridge Board of Health, wrote in a petition to the supervisor of records Feb. 1 that the board voted unanimously on Jan. 31 to deny seven records requests from Mr. Hannon between Jan. 19 and Jan. 26.
In the Board of Health’s opinion, “the requests are part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass, and the requests are not intended for broad dissemination of the information to the public about actual or alleged government activity,” he wrote.
“All of Mr. Hannon’s requests, with the possible exception of the request to the Water Department, are specific to town employees and offices that are investigating or are responsible for permitting soil projects,” Mr. Morrissette continued.
The requests involved 350 email accounts, 200 pages of notes and 53 pages of records for time cards or reimbursements.
On Feb. 8, Ms. Murray responded to the town insurer’s lawyer, granting an extension of 20 business days to fulfill Mr. Hannon’s requests. The town’s harassment argument did not prevail.
She did not grant an allowance to charge more than the $25 per hour
specified in the Public Records Law, in a separate ruling Feb. 24.
Another petition to the $25 an hour fee limit, in March, was also denied. Uxbridge representatives had estimated a cost of $255 to provide records for the building inspector/zoning enforcement officer’s emails and $595 to provide deleted emails from four different accounts.
Ms. Murray wrote in her March 25 opinion that “it is unclear whether ‘the amount of the fee is reasonable’ ... and how ‘the fee is not designed to limit, deter or prevent access to requested public records.’ ”
“The more common challenge is, you’re doing requests simply to burden a municipality,” Mr. Genereux said in an interview. “The question is to what end? We have challenged those before and sought more specificity from the requester.”
Uxbridge town meeting voters also approved last week additional spending for the School Department to hire an IT technician, who could help Town Hall manage some of the large records requests.
Mr. Genereux said, “I think in the end, cities and towns are just going to have to get more inventive in how they handle this.”
THE PUBLIC’S BUSINESS
Thomas Robinson, a Planning Board member and retired engineer in
Hubbardston, said in an interview that laws, like muscles, have to be
exercised.
“My goal is to have the public’s business done in public,” he said.
He began his quest for records after town officials launched what he considered to be a harassing investigation against him, handled in closed-door sessions and later dropped.
Mr. Robinson filed 30 out of a total 79 public records requests between Jan. 4 and Oct. 11. He said he filed two more a few days ago.
In April, Hubbardston officials indicated in a petition to the supervisor of records their belief that Mr. Robinson’s requests were “frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality.”
Among 10 requests submitted between Feb. 28 and April 21, the most recent pertained to CCTV records of cameras pointed at a parking lot.
The request to decline to provide the records was denied by Ms. Murray, although she left open the possibility of a time extension.
“At the height of the requests, it seemed like that was all I was
doing,” Hubbardston Town Clerk Joyce E. Green said. “It was distracting
because you had to do it by the deadline. The paperwork itself was
time-consuming.”
Mr. Robinson wrote in an email, “My requests were claimed to be frivolous and harassment by those who had to provide the information in an attempt, in my opinion, to avoid having to provide the requested documents. In addition, I have also paid considerable fees to get these documents, so the cost to the town is negligible.”
He said Town Hall has gotten better about providing records, and he estimated 75 to 80 percent of his requests are fulfilled. And he said the state Public Records Division has been very helpful, ordering the town to provide records.
But he said, “The towns still have the ability to obfuscate and block to a surprising extent.”
EXTENSIVE AND COSTLY
“There are communities, from time to time across the state, who challenge individuals who use the Public Records Act as a way to try to harass or intimidate local government for their own agenda, and this can really present a massive drain on local resources, especially for smaller communities,” said Geoffrey Beckwith, executive director and CEO of the Massachusetts Municipal Association.
He said he hoped the state would recognize more the anti-harassment provision in the updated law “so that communities can appropriately allocate their resources to provide services directly to the citizens, as opposed to having their staff time monopolized by individuals who have a separate agenda.”
Jim Lampke, who serves as executive director for the Massachusetts
Municipal Lawyers Association and is town counsel for Hull, said some
requests are “extensive and costly,” and some may be harassing.
Mr. Lampke said, “I think the towns are doing their best to comply with the new law. It’s a learning process with the towns. A good number probably have their problem requests.”
“People are using it (public records requests) as a weapon,” said Southbridge Town Manager Ronald S. San Angelo. “I’m fortunate I haven’t had that problem. But it definitely is occurring.”
TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE
Millbury Town Clerk Jayne Marie Davolio said she expected to receive an onslaught of records requests when the law changed, particularly since there was a controversial Planning Board issue about approval of a methadone treatment center going on.
“I was waiting for it. Everybody, be prepared,” she said she told her colleagues.
But other than a 2-inch-thick file of records requested by a lawyer and individuals involved in an unsuccessful lawsuit against the town, requests have been going smoothly.
Millbury had received 46 records requests by early October, with many
for voter information or vital records. According to Millbury’s record
information system, the average request was fulfilled in four or five
days.
“We haven’t found any increase in frivolous requests,” said Auburn Town Manager Julie A. Jacobson. “Our system seems to be working pretty well. We have a webpage set up just for this.”
Webster similarly has put many of its frequently requested records on its town website, according to Town Clerk Robert T. Craver. These typically include meeting minutes and contracts.
“It hasn’t been crazy at all,” Mr. Craver said.
Dudley Town Administrator Greg L. Balukonis said the town received a few records requests in the last year for municipal actions regarding a proposed cemetery for the Islamic Society of Greater Worcester. Most of that issue was handled through discovery as part of year-long legal wrangling, however.
“We try to be accommodating to people,” Mr. Balukonis said. “Anything that gives the public the right to have confidence in local government, we support.”
In Hubbardston, a single requester has racked up 38 percent of the records requests.
Both towns petitioned the supervisor of records in the secretary of state’s office earlier this year to be relieved of the requirement to provide requested documents and videotapes. One of the updates to the state Public Records Law, which went into effect Jan. 1, allows for exceptions on the grounds that requests are frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality.
The towns’ petitions arguing harassment were denied.
Two weeks ago, state Supervisor of Records Rebecca S. Murray issued the first granting of a request from a town to ignore public records requests from a citizen because of harassment.
In that case, Ms. Murray agreed with Wellesley’s petition that a recent request from resident Ronald Alexander, who had filed more than 200 public records requests since 2013, was at best “frivolous,” as town officials argued. Mr. Alexander had requested all of the 190 public records requests since 2013, most of which had been filed by him.
The Massachusetts Public Records Law gives people the right to access, in a reasonable manner and electronically if possible, documents and materials of the workings of state and local government. The law outlines deadlines, allowable fees and processes for appeals and exemption requests.
SMALL-TOWN BURDEN
Some local officials feel that, while the law’s intentions are noble, the burden of carrying out certain public records requests can be a lot to bear for communities with little staff and tight budgets.
Uxbridge town meeting voters approved last week a transfer of an additional $40,000, nearly 50 percent more than what was approved in the fiscal 2018 budget in May, into the legal services account, in part to pay for additional public records costs.
Town Manager David A. Genereux said that Town Hall doesn’t have its own information technology staff, so to pull hundreds or thousands of emails dating back decades costs $95 an hour paid to a contractor.
Material that is exempt from having to be released in public records must then be reviewed and, if necessary, redacted, for which town counsel charges $175 an hour.
The bulk of the Uxbridge requests this year, and the subject of the town’s claim of harassment, have come from resident Patrick J. Hannon, who operates two soil-importation projects in town and served until July on the Conservation Commission.
Mr. Hannon denied in an email that his requests have in any way been attempts to harass or intimidate town officials or employees.
Mr. Hannon filed 20 formal records requests, and his wife, Sofia Gagua, filed one request, between Nov. 14, 2016, and Oct. 4, according to the town clerk’s records log. There were 59 records requests from all sources logged for that time.
According to Ms. Dumas, it took two bulk paper boxes to contain the documents. “We scanned it before it went out because the size of it was immense,” she said.
Michael Morrissette, chairman of the Uxbridge Board of Health, wrote in a petition to the supervisor of records Feb. 1 that the board voted unanimously on Jan. 31 to deny seven records requests from Mr. Hannon between Jan. 19 and Jan. 26.
In the Board of Health’s opinion, “the requests are part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass, and the requests are not intended for broad dissemination of the information to the public about actual or alleged government activity,” he wrote.
“All of Mr. Hannon’s requests, with the possible exception of the request to the Water Department, are specific to town employees and offices that are investigating or are responsible for permitting soil projects,” Mr. Morrissette continued.
The requests involved 350 email accounts, 200 pages of notes and 53 pages of records for time cards or reimbursements.
On Feb. 8, Ms. Murray responded to the town insurer’s lawyer, granting an extension of 20 business days to fulfill Mr. Hannon’s requests. The town’s harassment argument did not prevail.
Another petition to the $25 an hour fee limit, in March, was also denied. Uxbridge representatives had estimated a cost of $255 to provide records for the building inspector/zoning enforcement officer’s emails and $595 to provide deleted emails from four different accounts.
Ms. Murray wrote in her March 25 opinion that “it is unclear whether ‘the amount of the fee is reasonable’ ... and how ‘the fee is not designed to limit, deter or prevent access to requested public records.’ ”
“The more common challenge is, you’re doing requests simply to burden a municipality,” Mr. Genereux said in an interview. “The question is to what end? We have challenged those before and sought more specificity from the requester.”
Uxbridge town meeting voters also approved last week additional spending for the School Department to hire an IT technician, who could help Town Hall manage some of the large records requests.
Mr. Genereux said, “I think in the end, cities and towns are just going to have to get more inventive in how they handle this.”
THE PUBLIC’S BUSINESS
“My goal is to have the public’s business done in public,” he said.
He began his quest for records after town officials launched what he considered to be a harassing investigation against him, handled in closed-door sessions and later dropped.
Mr. Robinson filed 30 out of a total 79 public records requests between Jan. 4 and Oct. 11. He said he filed two more a few days ago.
In April, Hubbardston officials indicated in a petition to the supervisor of records their belief that Mr. Robinson’s requests were “frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality.”
Among 10 requests submitted between Feb. 28 and April 21, the most recent pertained to CCTV records of cameras pointed at a parking lot.
The request to decline to provide the records was denied by Ms. Murray, although she left open the possibility of a time extension.
Mr. Robinson wrote in an email, “My requests were claimed to be frivolous and harassment by those who had to provide the information in an attempt, in my opinion, to avoid having to provide the requested documents. In addition, I have also paid considerable fees to get these documents, so the cost to the town is negligible.”
He said Town Hall has gotten better about providing records, and he estimated 75 to 80 percent of his requests are fulfilled. And he said the state Public Records Division has been very helpful, ordering the town to provide records.
But he said, “The towns still have the ability to obfuscate and block to a surprising extent.”
EXTENSIVE AND COSTLY
“There are communities, from time to time across the state, who challenge individuals who use the Public Records Act as a way to try to harass or intimidate local government for their own agenda, and this can really present a massive drain on local resources, especially for smaller communities,” said Geoffrey Beckwith, executive director and CEO of the Massachusetts Municipal Association.
He said he hoped the state would recognize more the anti-harassment provision in the updated law “so that communities can appropriately allocate their resources to provide services directly to the citizens, as opposed to having their staff time monopolized by individuals who have a separate agenda.”
Mr. Lampke said, “I think the towns are doing their best to comply with the new law. It’s a learning process with the towns. A good number probably have their problem requests.”
“People are using it (public records requests) as a weapon,” said Southbridge Town Manager Ronald S. San Angelo. “I’m fortunate I haven’t had that problem. But it definitely is occurring.”
TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE
Millbury Town Clerk Jayne Marie Davolio said she expected to receive an onslaught of records requests when the law changed, particularly since there was a controversial Planning Board issue about approval of a methadone treatment center going on.
“I was waiting for it. Everybody, be prepared,” she said she told her colleagues.
But other than a 2-inch-thick file of records requested by a lawyer and individuals involved in an unsuccessful lawsuit against the town, requests have been going smoothly.
“We haven’t found any increase in frivolous requests,” said Auburn Town Manager Julie A. Jacobson. “Our system seems to be working pretty well. We have a webpage set up just for this.”
Webster similarly has put many of its frequently requested records on its town website, according to Town Clerk Robert T. Craver. These typically include meeting minutes and contracts.
“It hasn’t been crazy at all,” Mr. Craver said.
Dudley Town Administrator Greg L. Balukonis said the town received a few records requests in the last year for municipal actions regarding a proposed cemetery for the Islamic Society of Greater Worcester. Most of that issue was handled through discovery as part of year-long legal wrangling, however.
“We try to be accommodating to people,” Mr. Balukonis said. “Anything that gives the public the right to have confidence in local government, we support.”
Pretty much all of the information that anyone would ask for is "public Information", or should be. This information should be easy to access. If it is not easy to access, then what is the problem ? Any public information asked for gives the people in the office ten days to produce it. That is not unreasonable.
ReplyDelete