• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • HOME
  • NEWS+OPINIONS
    • NEWS TO US
    • COLUMNS
      • APPARENT HORIZON
      • DEAR READER
      • Close
    • LONGFORM FEATURES
    • OPINIONS
    • EDITORIAL
    • Close
  • ARTS+ENTERTAINMENT
    • FILM
    • MUSIC
    • COMEDY
    • PERFORMING ARTS
    • VISUAL ARTS
    • Close
  • DINING+DRINKING
    • EATS
    • SIPS
    • BOSTON BETTER BEER BUREAU
    • Close
  • LIFESTYLE
    • CANNABIS
      • TALKING JOINTS MEMO
      • Close
    • WELLNESS
    • GTFO
    • Close
  • STUFF TO DO
  • TICKETS
  • ABOUT US
    • ABOUT
    • MASTHEAD
    • ADVERTISE
    • PRIVACY POLICY
    • Close
  • BECOME A MEMBER

Dig Bos

The Dig - Boston's Only Newspaper

BROKEN RECORDS: APPEALS NONSENSE

Written by ANDREW QUEMERE AND MAYA SHAFFER Posted September 20, 2016 Filed Under: COLUMNS, News, NEWS+OPINIONS

18-38-broken-records-image

 

Secretary of the Commonwealth Galvin attempts to rewrite law in order to dodge it

 

 

An update to the Massachusetts public records law is set to go into effect in January, and with it a new set of regulations drafted by Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin’s office. To those unfamiliar with the quagmire that is Massachusetts records access, this might sound like a “Victory!” for transparency, but it isn’t. Unfortunately, Galvin’s office has sought to undermine the new law by proposing regulations that would exempt the office from several important responsibilities.

 

Under both the old and new records law, the Secretary of the Commonwealth is responsible for ruling on appeals from people who are denied access to public records. Journalists, lawyers, activists, and others file hundreds of these appeals every year; in fact, using the appeals process is a fairly routine part of requesting records in Mass because of the comic regularity with which government agencies break the law. Last year, a massive audit by Northeastern University journalism students, WCVB, and the Boston Globe found that 58 percent—the majority—of the Commonwealth’s 351 municipalities did not even meet the low bar of responding to records requests on time. Recently, Globe reporter Todd Wallack found that nearly half of appeals filed this year were submitted simply because an agency did not respond to a request.

 

Despite the importance of the appeals process, the old law gave Galvin’s office discretion on whether to rule on appeals, leaving requesters at its mercy. Sometimes it declines to do so or simply does not respond to them at all. In the update, however, state legislators made it mandatory, writing that the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s office “shall issue a written determination regarding any” appeal, according to the new law that was passed unanimously by House and Senate lawmakers (emphasis added).

 

Instead of accepting the new law as written, Galvin’s office has decided to reinterpret it to mean the same thing as the old one. According to the proposed regulations, which were released last week, “it shall be within the discretion of [Galvin’s office] whether to open an appeal concerning a request for public records.” The regulations state that Galvin’s office may decline to rule on an appeal for one of several listed reasons—or for no reason at all.

 

State lawmakers limited the time allowable for Galvin’s office to rule on appeals after the media criticized Galvin for dragging out the appeals process for months, but in his proposed regulations Galvin would exempt his office from this time limit. The new law states that Galvin’s office must rule on all appeals “not later than 10 business days following [their] receipt.” That’s two weeks—still a fairly generous amount of time—but Galvin’s office came up with a neat trick for dodging the new deadline: It simply redefined what it means to “receive” an appeal. The proposed regulations state that Galvin’s office must review and assign a number to each appeal it receives. Only then does the appeal count as being “received,” and only then do the 10 business days begin. This delay only applies to members of the public who file appeals. When an agency petitions the Secretary of the Commonwealth under the new law, Galvin’s office uses a definition of “receiving” that an English speaker would recognize.

 

That may not sound like a big deal—after all, how long should it take to review a letter and assign it a number? But there’s little doubt it will significantly delay the appeals process. When we examined our own appeals for a column published earlier this year, we found it took Galvin’s office an average of about 11 days to assign a number. And if Galvin’s office decides it wants to continue taking months to issue rulings, all it needs to do is wait even longer.

 

The Secretary of the Commonwealth’s employees don’t always count in business days, either. When it comes to narrowing the window of time for a requester to file an appeal, the regulations switch to calendar days—specifically, a 90-calendar-day deadline, which is arbitrary and not specified anywhere in the law.

 

Drafting these regulations was an opportunity to clarify vague and troubling language, but Galvin’s office has failed to address several issues left by state lawmakers. For instance, the new measure allows an agency to petition Galvin’s office to be relieved of its duty to provide records if a request is “part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass”—but none of these terms are defined within the law. They aren’t defined in the regulations either, and to top it off, Galvin’s office plans to use them as reasons to refuse to open appeals.

 

The regulations also double down on a nonsensical rule that allows agencies to refuse to provide more records to anyone “who has failed to compensate the agency or municipality for previously produced public records.” The regulations say an agency can deny records on this basis as long as the agency “prepared a fee estimate” for the previously produced records. However, the regulations do not state that the requester has to have agreed to pay the fee, which is very troubling considering fees can sometimes be thousands or even millions of dollars—making them impossible for most requesters, even profitable news organizations, to afford. The old system, where agencies simply collected fees before providing records, was much more logical.

 

Galvin’s proposed regulations are subject to a public hearing and a written comment period before they become official and hold the weight of law. The hearing will be on Thursday, Oct 6, at 11 am in the 17th floor conference room of the Office of the Secretary, 1 Ashburton Place, in Boston. We hope our readers will attend or send in written testimony calling on Galvin to clean up these regulations—especially the exemptions he gave his office from the law. The Massachusetts Municipal Association, a taxpayer-funded lobbyist group that has been fighting against public records reform, will be testifying, so it’s important that transparency advocates counter its effort.

 

You can submit written testimony here:

Shawn A. Williams, Supervisor of Public Records
Public Records Division
Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth
One Ashburton Place, Room 1719
Boston, MA 02108

 

1-YKjDln37BiNB8Cmaz0uHyQBroken Records is a biweekly column produced in partnership between the Boston Institute for Nonprofit Journalism, DigBoston, and the Bay State Examiner. Follow BINJ on Twitter @BINJreports for upcoming installments of Maya and Andrew’s ongoing reporting on public information.

Author profile
ANDREW QUEMERE AND MAYA SHAFFER
Related posts
  • ANDREW QUEMERE AND MAYA SHAFFER
    https://digboston.com/author/andrew-quemere-and-maya-shaffer/
    BROKEN RECORDS: REFER MADNESS
  • ANDREW QUEMERE AND MAYA SHAFFER
    https://digboston.com/author/andrew-quemere-and-maya-shaffer/
    BROKEN RECORDS: CAPELESS, AND USELESS
  • ANDREW QUEMERE AND MAYA SHAFFER
    https://digboston.com/author/andrew-quemere-and-maya-shaffer/
    BROKEN RECORDS: WHAT THE FOIA?!
  • ANDREW QUEMERE AND MAYA SHAFFER
    https://digboston.com/author/andrew-quemere-and-maya-shaffer/
    MASS RECORDS LAW STILL BROKEN

Filed Under: COLUMNS, News, NEWS+OPINIONS Tagged With: Beacon Hill, Broken Records, Commonwealth, house, Mass Municipal Association, Massachusetts, MMA, public records, public records reform, Secretary of State, senate, William Galvin

WHAT’S NEW

Photo Recap: Weekend Of Boston Rallies Against SCOTUS Abortion Decision

Photo Recap: Weekend Of Boston Rallies Against SCOTUS Abortion Decision

Inbox: "Debate for Suffolk DA and Sheriff Races This Tuesday"

Inbox: “Debate for Suffolk DA and Sheriff Races This Tuesday”

Inbox: "Coalition Celebrates Advancement of Safe Communities Act"

Inbox: “Coalition Celebrates Advancement of Safe Communities Act”

Boston University. Photographed by Janice Checchio for Boston University Photography. Used with permission.

BU Vows to Protect Reproductive Healthcare

State Wire: Last Decade Has Seen Too Many Methane Gas Leaks

State Wire: Last Decade Has Seen Too Many Methane Gas Leaks

Abortion rights protestors in Copley Square, Boston, the evening of the SCOTUS decision to strike down Roe v. Wade. Photo by Charlotte Howard. Photo by Charlotte Howard

Protestors Gather in Copley Square to Fight for Abortion Rights

Primary Sidebar

Advertisement

FEATURED EVENT

Advertisement

Most Popular

  • Dig This: The Return Of the Boston Seafood Festival
  • Meet the Phantom Behind Greater Boston’s Awesome Food Feed Everybody Gotta Eat
  • Dig This: The Hot Dog Safari Food Truck & Craft Beer Festival
  • No Smoking, No Thank You. Advocates Decry Cannabis Social Consumption Rules in Mass
  • Why This Pit Kid Is Not Going to ‘Pit-A-Palooza’

Footer

Social Buttons

DigBoston facebook DigBoston Twitter DigBoston Instagram

Masthead

About

Advertise

Privacy Policy

Customer Service

Distribution

About Us

DigBoston is a one-stop nexus for everything worth doing or knowing in the Boston area. It's an alt-weekly, it's a website, it's an e-mail blast, it's a twitter account, it's that cool party that you were at last night ... hey, you're reading it, so it's gotta be good. For advertising inquiries: [email protected] To reach Editorial: [email protected] For internship opportunities: [email protected]