Wareham Sewers
| Submitted | Dec. 2, 2016 |
| Est. Completion | July 11, 2017 |
MuckRock users can file, duplicate, track, and share public records requests like this one. Learn more.
Communications
From: Caitlin Russell
To Whom It May Concern:
Pursuant to the Massachusetts Public Records Law, M.G.L. c.66, §10, I hereby request the following records:
-Any and all emails between any and all members of the Wareham Board of Selectmen from April 2013 to Dec. 2016 containing keywords and phrases “sewer”, “sewerage”, “Inter-municipal agreement”, “sewer commission”, “sewer commissioners”, “indirect costs”, “independent counsel”, “Guy Campinha”, and “Marilyn Jordan.”
-Any and all emails between any members of the Wareham Board of Selectmen and the Town Administrator’s office from April 2013 to Dec. 2016 containing keywords and phrases “sewer”, “sewerage”, “Inter-municipal agreement”, “sewer commission”, “sewer commissioners”, “Guy Campinha”, “Marilyn Jordan”, “indirect costs”, and “independent counsel.”
-Any and all emails between any and all members of the the Wareham Board of Selectmen and any and all members of the Wareham Board of Sewer Commissioners from May 2015 to Dec. 2016.
I also request that, if appropriate, fees be waived as we believe this request is in the public interest, as suggested but not stipulated by the recommendations of the Massachusetts Supervisor of Public Records. The requested documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at MuckRock.com, processed by a representative of the news media/press and is made in the process of news gathering and not for commercial usage.
I expect the request to be filled in an accessible format, including for screen readers, which provide text-to-speech for persons unable to read print. Files that are not accessible to screen readers include, for example, .pdf image files as well as physical documents.
In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.
Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 10 calendar days, as the statute requires.
Sincerely,
Caitlin Russell
From: MuckRock.com
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Dec. 2, 2016. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: MuckRock.com
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Dec. 2, 2016. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: MuckRock.com
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Dec. 2, 2016. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: MuckRock.com
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Dec. 2, 2016. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: MuckRock.com
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Dec. 2, 2016. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Caitlin Russell
To Whom It May Concern:
Pursuant to the Massachusetts Public Records Law, M.G.L. c.66, §10, I hereby request the following records:
-Any and all emails between any and all members of the Wareham Board of Selectmen from April 2013 to Dec. 2016 containing keywords and phrases “sewer”, “sewerage”, “Inter-municipal agreement”, “sewer commission”, “sewer commissioners”, “indirect costs”, “independent counsel”, “Guy Campinha”, and “Marilyn Jordan.”
-Any and all emails between any members of the Wareham Board of Selectmen and the Town Administrator’s office from April 2013 to Dec. 2016 containing keywords and phrases “sewer”, “sewerage”, “Inter-municipal agreement”, “sewer commission”, “sewer commissioners”, “Guy Campinha”, “Marilyn Jordan”, “indirect costs”, and “independent counsel.”
-Any and all emails between any and all members of the the Wareham Board of Selectmen and any and all members of the Wareham Board of Sewer Commissioners from May 2015 to Dec. 2016.
I also request that, if appropriate, fees be waived as we believe this request is in the public interest, as suggested but not stipulated by the recommendations of the Massachusetts Supervisor of Public Records. The requested documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at MuckRock.com, processed by a representative of the news media/press and is made in the process of news gathering and not for commercial usage.
I expect the request to be filled in an accessible format, including for screen readers, which provide text-to-speech for persons unable to read print. Files that are not accessible to screen readers include, for example, .pdf image files as well as physical documents.
In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.
Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 10 calendar days, as the statute requires.
Sincerely,
Caitlin Russell
From: Caitlin Russell
Hi Janet,
Here's the text of the original request:
To Whom It May Concern:
Pursuant to the Massachusetts Public Records Law, M.G.L. c.66, §10, I hereby request the following records:
-Any and all emails between any and all members of the Wareham Board of Selectmen from April 2013 to Dec. 2016 containing keywords and phrases “sewer”, “sewerage”, “Inter-municipal agreement”, “sewer commission”, “sewer commissioners”, “indirect costs”, “independent counsel”, “Guy Campinha”, and “Marilyn Jordan.”
-Any and all emails between any members of the Wareham Board of Selectmen and the Town Administrator’s office from April 2013 to Dec. 2016 containing keywords and phrases “sewer”, “sewerage”, “Inter-municipal agreement”, “sewer commission”, “sewer commissioners”, “Guy Campinha”, “Marilyn Jordan”, “indirect costs”, and “independent counsel.”
-Any and all emails between any and all members of the the Wareham Board of Selectmen and any and all members of the Wareham Board of Sewer Commissioners from May 2015 to Dec. 2016.
I also request that, if appropriate, fees be waived as we believe this request is in the public interest, as suggested but not stipulated by the recommendations of the Massachusetts Supervisor of Public Records. The requested documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at MuckRock.com, processed by a representative of the news media/press and is made in the process of news gathering and not for commercial usage.
I expect the request to be filled in an accessible format, including for screen readers, which provide text-to-speech for persons unable to read print. Files that are not accessible to screen readers include, for example, .pdf image files as well as physical documents.
In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.
Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 10 calendar days, as the statute requires.
Sincerely,
Caitlin Russell
From: Janet Wilson
Ms. Russell,
I have received your request .
Janet Wilson
Department Assistant
Selectmen's Office
54 Marion Road
Wareham, MA 02571
508-291-3100 x 3101
508-291-3116 fax
From: Jenna Correia
Good morning Caitlin,
In response to your public request, we are not able to provide any emails prior to December 11, 2015. We had to migrate our email to a new service provider by December 31, 2015 as our old vendor was no longer providing email services. After the migration we tried to schedule the pickup of the email archiving appliance that was housed in their storage facility and the vendor was unable to find our appliance.
Based on the criteria in the request there will be thousands of emails. These emails will need to be reviewed by someone (probably Town Council) to make sure there is no personal data, HIPA, or other exemptions within the emails that would need to be redacted.
This size of this export will be too large to email so we will have to put it on a cd.
Please let us know how you would like us to proceed.
Thank you.
Jenna L. Correia
Department Assistant III
Town of Wareham Clerk's Office
508-291-3100 x 3142
Disclaimer
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out more visit the Mimecast website.
From: Caitlin Russell
Yes, I do want you to proceed.
From: Jenna Correia
Hi Caitlin
I will speak with the IT department and we will work on having the CD compiled. I will check and see how long the entire process will take and get back to you with that and any associated costs.
Thank you.
Jenna L. Correia
Department Assistant III
Town of Wareham Clerk's Office
508-291-3100 x 3142
From: Caitlin Russell
Thank you.
I'd like to also request that you check again with your vendor with regard to obtaining emails that were sent and received prior to Dec. 11, 2015. Regardless of the difficulty the vendor might be having in finding your appliance, I believe the Town is ultimately responsible for ensuring that these emails are retrievable as they are subject to the Massachusetts Public Records Law. Thank you again for all your help.
Best,
Caitlin Russell
From: Caitlin Russell
Hello,
I just wanted to follow up and ask if you've had any luck recovering information from the town's previous vendor. Thanks for all your help.
Caitlin Russell
From: Richard Bowen
Dear Ms. Russell,
I am writing on behalf of Records Access Officer ("RAO") Mary Ann Silva in connection with your records request dated January 24, 2017. I respectfully draw your attention to the Secretary of State's regulations at 950 CMR 32.07 (2) (n), which provide:
(n) Failure to Pay Fee. A records access officer may provide written notice denying access to public records to a requester who has failed to compensate the custodian for previously produced public records, provided:
1. a fee estimate for a previous request was prepared in compliance with 950 CMR 32.00 and the requester agreed to pay the previous fee;
2. the written notice details the reasons for denial, including an itemized list of any balances attributed to previously produced records.
I have attached a copy of correspondence related to an earlier records request. On November 4, 2016 you agreed to pay Ms. Wilson's November 3, 2016 estimate of $30.56 for the requested records. However, the Town has no record of receiving your promised payment.
If you can send the RAO a canceled copy of the promised check or can pay the previously agreed upon amount, the Town will prepare an estimate for your current records request, and, upon payment, provide such of the documents requested as are in its possession that are not subject to exemption.
You may appeal this determination in the manner specified by statute, which I have excerpted from the Secretary of State's website and set out below for your convenience.
Best wishes,
Rich Bowen
Administrative and Judicial Remedies G. L. c. 66, § 10A
(a) If an agency or municipality fails to comply with a requirement of section 10 or issues a response the requestor believes in violation of section 10, the person who submitted the initial request for public records may petition the supervisor of records for a determination as to whether a violation has occurred. In assessing whether a violation has occurred, the supervisor of records may inspect any record or copy of a record in camera; provided, however, that where a record has been withheld on the basis of a claim of the attorney-client privilege, the supervisor of records shall not inspect the record but shall require, as part of the decision making process, that the agency or municipality provide a detailed description of the record, including the names of the author and recipients, the date, the substance of such record, and the grounds upon which the attorney-client privilege is being claimed. If an agency or municipality elects to provide a record, claimed to be subject to the attorney-client privilege, to the supervisor of records for in camera inspection, said inspection shall not waive any legally applicable privileges, including without limitation, the attorney- client privilege and the attorney work product privilege. The supervisor of records shall issue a written determination regarding any petition submitted in accordance with this section not later than 10 business days following receipt of the petition by the supervisor of records. Upon a determination by the supervisor of records that a violation has occurred, the supervisor of records shall order timely and appropriate relief. A requestor, aggrieved by an order issued by the supervisor of records or upon the failure of the supervisor of records to issue a timely determination, may obtain judicial review only through an action in superior court seeking relief in the nature of certiorari under section 4 of chapter 249 and as prescribed in subsection (d).
(b) If an agency or municipality refuses or fails to comply with an order issued by the supervisor of records, the supervisor of records may notify the attorney general who, after consultation with the supervisor of records, may take whatever measures the attorney general considers necessary to ensure compliance. If the attorney general files an action to compel compliance, the action shall be filed in Suffolk superior court with respect to state agencies and, with respect to municipalities, in the superior court in the county in which the municipality is located. The attorney general shall designate an individual within the office of the attorney general to serve as a primary point of contact for the supervisor of records. In addition to any other duties the attorney general may impose, the designee shall serve as a primary point of contact within the office of the attorney general regarding notice from the supervisor of records that an agency or municipality has refused or failed to comply with an order issued by the supervisor of records.
(c) Notwithstanding the procedure in subsections (a) or (b), a requestor may initiate a civil action to enforce the requirements of this chapter. Any action under this subsection shall be filed in Suffolk superior court with respect to agencies and, with respect to municipalities, in the superior court in the county in which the municipality is located. The superior court shall have available all remedies at law or in equity; provided, however, that any damages awarded shall be consistent with subsection
(d). (d)(1) In any action filed by a requestor pursuant to this section: (i) the superior court shall have jurisdiction to enjoin agency or municipal action; (ii) the superior court shall determine the propriety of any agency or municipal action de novo and may inspect the contents of any defendant agency or municipality record in camera, provided, however, that the in camera review shall not waive any legally applicable privileges, including without limitation, the attorney- client privilege and the attorney work product privilege; (iii) the superior court shall, when feasible, expedite the proceeding; (iv) a presumption shall exist that each record sought is public and the burden shall be on the defendant agency or municipality to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that such record or portion of the record may be withheld in accordance with state or federal law. (2) The superior court may award reasonable attorney fees and costs in any case in which the requester obtains relief through a judicial order, consent decree, or the provision of requested documents after the filing of a complaint. There shall be a presumption in favor of an award of fees and costs unless the agency or municipality establishes that: (i) the supervisor found that the agency or municipality did not violate this chapter; (ii) the agency or municipality reasonably relied upon a published opinion of an appellate court of the commonwealth based on substantially similar facts; (iii) the agency or municipality reasonably relied upon a published opinion by the attorney general based on substantially similar facts; (iv) the request was designed or intended to harass or intimidate; or (v) the request was not in the public interest and made for a commercial purpose unrelated to disseminating information to the public about actual or alleged government activity. If the superior court determines that an award of reasonable attorney fees or costs is not warranted, the judge shall issue written findings specifying the reasons for the denial. (3) If the superior court awards reasonable attorneys' fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred to the requestor, it shall order the agency or municipality to waive any fee assessed under subsection (d) of section 10. If the superior court does not award reasonable attorneys' fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred to the requestor, it may order the agency or municipality to waive any fee assessed under said subsection (d) of said section 10. Whether the superior court determines to waive any fee assessed under said subsection (d) of said section 10, it shall issue findings specifying the basis for such decision. (4) If a requestor has obtained judgment in superior court in a case under this section and has demonstrated that the defendant agency or municipality, in withholding or failing to timely furnish the requested record or any portion of the record or in assessing an unreasonable fee, did not act in good faith, the superior court may assess punitive damages against the defendant agency or municipality in an amount not less than $1,000 nor more than $5,000, to be deposited into the Public Records Assistance Fund established in section 35DDD of chapter 10.
(e) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the attorney general may, at any time, file a complaint in Suffolk superior court with respect to agencies and, with respect to municipalities, in the superior court in the county in which the municipality is located, to ensure compliance with this chapter and may further intervene as of right in any action filed in accordance with this section. In any action filed or in which the attorney general has intervened under this subsection, paragraphs (1) and (4) of subsection (d) shall apply and any public records the court orders produced shall be provided without a fee.
________________________________
From: Richard Bowen
Dear Ms. Russell,
I am writing on behalf of Records Access Officer ("RAO") Mary Ann Silva in connection with your records request dated January 24, 2017. I respectfully draw your attention to the Secretary of State's regulations at 950 CMR 32.07 (2) (n), which provide:
(n) Failure to Pay Fee. A records access officer may provide written notice denying access to public records to a requester who has failed to compensate the custodian for previously produced public records, provided:
1. a fee estimate for a previous request was prepared in compliance with 950 CMR 32.00 and the requester agreed to pay the previous fee;
2. the written notice details the reasons for denial, including an itemized list of any balances attributed to previously produced records.
I have attached a copy of correspondence related to an earlier records request. On November 4, 2016 you agreed to pay Ms. Wilson's November 3, 2016 estimate of $30.56 for the requested records. However, the Town has no record of receiving your promised payment.
If you can send the RAO a canceled copy of the promised check or can pay the previously agreed upon amount, the Town will prepare an estimate for your current records request, and, upon payment, provide such of the documents requested as are in its possession that are not subject to exemption.
You may appeal this determination in the manner specified by statute, which I have excerpted from the Secretary of State's website and set out below for your convenience.
Best wishes,
Rich Bowen
Administrative and Judicial Remedies G. L. c. 66, § 10A
(a) If an agency or municipality fails to comply with a requirement of section 10 or issues a response the requestor believes in violation of section 10, the person who submitted the initial request for public records may petition the supervisor of records for a determination as to whether a violation has occurred. In assessing whether a violation has occurred, the supervisor of records may inspect any record or copy of a record in camera; provided, however, that where a record has been withheld on the basis of a claim of the attorney-client privilege, the supervisor of records shall not inspect the record but shall require, as part of the decision making process, that the agency or municipality provide a detailed description of the record, including the names of the author and recipients, the date, the substance of such record, and the grounds upon which the attorney-client privilege is being claimed. If an agency or municipality elects to provide a record, claimed to be subject to the attorney-client privilege, to the supervisor of records for in camera inspection, said inspection shall not waive any legally applicable privileges, including without limitation, the attorney- client privilege and the attorney work product privilege. The supervisor of records shall issue a written determination regarding any petition submitted in accordance with this section not later than 10 business days following receipt of the petition by the supervisor of records. Upon a determination by the supervisor of records that a violation has occurred, the supervisor of records shall order timely and appropriate relief. A requestor, aggrieved by an order issued by the supervisor of records or upon the failure of the supervisor of records to issue a timely determination, may obtain judicial review only through an action in superior court seeking relief in the nature of certiorari under section 4 of chapter 249 and as prescribed in subsection (d).
(b) If an agency or municipality refuses or fails to comply with an order issued by the supervisor of records, the supervisor of records may notify the attorney general who, after consultation with the supervisor of records, may take whatever measures the attorney general considers necessary to ensure compliance. If the attorney general files an action to compel compliance, the action shall be filed in Suffolk superior court with respect to state agencies and, with respect to municipalities, in the superior court in the county in which the municipality is located. The attorney general shall designate an individual within the office of the attorney general to serve as a primary point of contact for the supervisor of records. In addition to any other duties the attorney general may impose, the designee shall serve as a primary point of contact within the office of the attorney general regarding notice from the supervisor of records that an agency or municipality has refused or failed to comply with an order issued by the supervisor of records.
(c) Notwithstanding the procedure in subsections (a) or (b), a requestor may initiate a civil action to enforce the requirements of this chapter. Any action under this subsection shall be filed in Suffolk superior court with respect to agencies and, with respect to municipalities, in the superior court in the county in which the municipality is located. The superior court shall have available all remedies at law or in equity; provided, however, that any damages awarded shall be consistent with subsection
(d). (d)(1) In any action filed by a requestor pursuant to this section: (i) the superior court shall have jurisdiction to enjoin agency or municipal action; (ii) the superior court shall determine the propriety of any agency or municipal action de novo and may inspect the contents of any defendant agency or municipality record in camera, provided, however, that the in camera review shall not waive any legally applicable privileges, including without limitation, the attorney- client privilege and the attorney work product privilege; (iii) the superior court shall, when feasible, expedite the proceeding; (iv) a presumption shall exist that each record sought is public and the burden shall be on the defendant agency or municipality to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that such record or portion of the record may be withheld in accordance with state or federal law. (2) The superior court may award reasonable attorney fees and costs in any case in which the requester obtains relief through a judicial order, consent decree, or the provision of requested documents after the filing of a complaint. There shall be a presumption in favor of an award of fees and costs unless the agency or municipality establishes that: (i) the supervisor found that the agency or municipality did not violate this chapter; (ii) the agency or municipality reasonably relied upon a published opinion of an appellate court of the commonwealth based on substantially similar facts; (iii) the agency or municipality reasonably relied upon a published opinion by the attorney general based on substantially similar facts; (iv) the request was designed or intended to harass or intimidate; or (v) the request was not in the public interest and made for a commercial purpose unrelated to disseminating information to the public about actual or alleged government activity. If the superior court determines that an award of reasonable attorney fees or costs is not warranted, the judge shall issue written findings specifying the reasons for the denial. (3) If the superior court awards reasonable attorneys' fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred to the requestor, it shall order the agency or municipality to waive any fee assessed under subsection (d) of section 10. If the superior court does not award reasonable attorneys' fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred to the requestor, it may order the agency or municipality to waive any fee assessed under said subsection (d) of said section 10. Whether the superior court determines to waive any fee assessed under said subsection (d) of said section 10, it shall issue findings specifying the basis for such decision. (4) If a requestor has obtained judgment in superior court in a case under this section and has demonstrated that the defendant agency or municipality, in withholding or failing to timely furnish the requested record or any portion of the record or in assessing an unreasonable fee, did not act in good faith, the superior court may assess punitive damages against the defendant agency or municipality in an amount not less than $1,000 nor more than $5,000, to be deposited into the Public Records Assistance Fund established in section 35DDD of chapter 10.
(e) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the attorney general may, at any time, file a complaint in Suffolk superior court with respect to agencies and, with respect to municipalities, in the superior court in the county in which the municipality is located, to ensure compliance with this chapter and may further intervene as of right in any action filed in accordance with this section. In any action filed or in which the attorney general has intervened under this subsection, paragraphs (1) and (4) of subsection (d) shall apply and any public records the court orders produced shall be provided without a fee.
________________________________
From: Jenna Correia
Hi Caitlin
I just wanted to follow up/ reply to your email. Did you receive the response from Attorney Rich Bowen?
Jenna L. Correia
Department Assistant III
Town of Wareham Clerk's Office
508-291-3100 x 3142
From: Caitlin Russell
Hello,
I did receive Bowen's email.
A money order in the amount of $30.56 was mailed to the Wareham Town Hall Friday, Feb. 3, and should be arriving soon if it hasn't already. Please email me to confirm receipt of the money order, and to to let me know if the Town intends to fill the request copied below, and originally sent to the Board of Selectmen's email address on Dec. 2, 2016:
-Any and all emails between any and all members of the Wareham Board of Selectmen from April 2013 to Dec. 2016 containing keywords and phrases “sewer”, “sewerage”, “Inter-municipal agreement”, “sewer commission”, “sewer commissioners”, “indirect costs”, “independent counsel”, “Guy Campinha”, and “Marilyn Jordan.”
-Any and all emails between any members of the Wareham Board of Selectmen and the Town Administrator’s office from April 2013 to Dec. 2016 containing keywords and phrases “sewer”, “sewerage”, “Inter-municipal agreement”, “sewer commission”, “sewer commissioners”, “Guy Campinha”, “Marilyn Jordan”, “indirect costs”, and “independent counsel.”
-Any and all emails between any and all members of the the Wareham Board of Selectmen and any and all members of the Wareham Board of Sewer Commissioners from May 2015 to Dec. 2016.
Thank you!
Caitlin Russell
From: MuckRock.com
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Dec. 2, 2016. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: MuckRock.com
To Whom It May Concern:
I wanted to follow up on the following Freedom of Information request, copied below, and originally submitted on Dec. 2, 2016. Please let me know when I can expect to receive a response, or if further clarification is needed.
Thanks for your help, and let me know if further clarification is needed.
From: Jenna Correia
To: Caitlin
Please refer to my response dated 3/29/17 regarding your public request submitted on 12/2/16.
I have inserted the email for your reference as well as attached a copy.
To Caitlin:
I am writing on behalf of Records Access Officer ("RAO") Mary Ann Silva in connection with your public request dated 12/2/16 for:
"-Any and all emails between any and all members of the Wareham Board of Selectmen from April 2013 to Dec. 2016 containing keywords and phrases “sewer”, “sewerage”, “Inter-municipal agreement”, “sewer commission”, “sewer commissioners”, “indirect costs”, “independent counsel”, “Guy Campinha”, and “Marilyn Jordan.”
-Any and all emails between any members of the Wareham Board of Selectmen and the Town Administrator’s office from April 2013 to Dec. 2016 containing keywords and phrases “sewer”, “sewerage”, “Inter-municipal agreement”, “sewer commission”, “sewer commissioners”, “Guy Campinha”, “Marilyn Jordan”, “indirect costs”, and “independent counsel.”
-Any and all emails between any and all members of the the Wareham Board of Selectmen and any and all members of the Wareham Board of Sewer Commissioners from May 2015 to Dec. 2016.”
To date, we have not received payment of $33.75 for this request.
I have attached a copy of correspondence related to this request. On February 15, 2017 you agreed to pay the Town of Wareham $33.75 for the requested records. However, the Town has no record of receiving your promised payment. If you can send the RAO a canceled copy of the promised check or can pay the previously agreed upon amount, the Town will and, upon payment, provide such documents requested that are in its possession that are not subject to exemption.
The money order you mailed in for $30.56 (received by the Town Clerk's office on 2/8/17) covered the executive session Board of Selectmen meeting minutes for years 2010-2015, which was a previous public request submitted by you on 10/25/16.
We did receive your third public request on March 12, 2017, however per 950 CMR, section 32.07, item N:
* (n) Failure to Pay Fee. A records access officer may provide written notice denying access to public records to a requester who has failed to compensate the custodian for previously produced public records, provided: 1. a fee estimate for a previous request was prepared in compliance with 950 CMR 32.00 and the requester agreed to pay the previous fee; 2. the written notice details the reasons for denial, including an itemized list of any balances attributed to previously produced records.
You may appeal this determination in the manner specified by statute, which I have excerpted from the Secretary of State's website and set out below for your convenience.
Thank you.
Jenna L. Correia
Department Assistant III
Town of Wareham Clerk's Office
508-291-3100 x 3142
Administrative and Judicial Remedies G. L. c. 66, § 10A
(a) If an agency or municipality fails to comply with a requirement of section 10 or issues a response the requestor believes in violation of section 10, the person who submitted the initial request for public records may petition the supervisor of records for a determination as to whether a violation has occurred. In assessing whether a violation has occurred, the supervisor of records may inspect any record or copy of a record in camera; provided, however, that where a record has been withheld on the basis of a claim of the attorney-client privilege, the supervisor of records shall not inspect the record but shall require, as part of the decision making process, that the agency or municipality provide a detailed description of the record, including the names of the author and recipients, the date, the substance of such record, and the grounds upon which the attorney-client privilege is being claimed. If an agency or municipality elects to provide a record, claimed to be subject to the attorney-client privilege, to the supervisor of records for in camera inspection, said inspection shall not waive any legally applicable privileges, including without limitation, the attorney- client privilege and the attorney work product privilege. The supervisor of records shall issue a written determination regarding any petition submitted in accordance with this section not later than 10 business days following receipt of the petition by the supervisor of records. Upon a determination by the supervisor of records that a violation has occurred, the supervisor of records shall order timely and appropriate relief. A requestor, aggrieved by an order issued by the supervisor of records or upon the failure of the supervisor of records to issue a timely determination, may obtain judicial review only through an action in superior court seeking relief in the nature of certiorari under section 4 of chapter 249 and as prescribed in subsection (d).
(b) If an agency or municipality refuses or fails to comply with an order issued by the supervisor of records, the supervisor of records may notify the attorney general who, after consultation with the supervisor of records, may take whatever measures the attorney general considers necessary to ensure compliance. If the attorney general files an action to compel compliance, the action shall be filed in Suffolk superior court with respect to state agencies and, with respect to municipalities, in the superior court in the county in which the municipality is located. The attorney general shall designate an individual within the office of the attorney general to serve as a primary point of contact for the supervisor of records. In addition to any other duties the attorney general may impose, the designee shall serve as a primary point of contact within the office of the attorney general regarding notice from the supervisor of records that an agency or municipality has refused or failed to comply with an order issued by the supervisor of records.
(c) Notwithstanding the procedure in subsections (a) or (b), a requestor may initiate a civil action to enforce the requirements of this chapter. Any action under this subsection shall be filed in Suffolk superior court with respect to agencies and, with respect to municipalities, in the superior court in the county in which the municipality is located. The superior court shall have available all remedies at law or in equity; provided, however, that any damages awarded shall be consistent with subsection
(d). (d)(1) In any action filed by a requestor pursuant to this section: (i) the superior court shall have jurisdiction to enjoin agency or municipal action; (ii) the superior court shall determine the propriety of any agency or municipal action de novo and may inspect the contents of any defendant agency or municipality record in camera, provided, however, that the in camera review shall not waive any legally applicable privileges, including without limitation, the attorney- client privilege and the attorney work product privilege; (iii) the superior court shall, when feasible, expedite the proceeding; (iv) a presumption shall exist that each record sought is public and the burden shall be on the defendant agency or municipality to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that such record or portion of the record may be withheld in accordance with state or federal law. (2) The superior court may award reasonable attorney fees and costs in any case in which the requester obtains relief through a judicial order, consent decree, or the provision of requested documents after the filing of a complaint. There shall be a presumption in favor of an award of fees and costs unless the agency or municipality establishes that: (i) the supervisor found that the agency or municipality did not violate this chapter; (ii) the agency or municipality reasonably relied upon a published opinion of an appellate court of the commonwealth based on substantially similar facts; (iii) the agency or municipality reasonably relied upon a published opinion by the attorney general based on substantially similar facts; (iv) the request was designed or intended to harass or intimidate; or (v) the request was not in the public interest and made for a commercial purpose unrelated to disseminating information to the public about actual or alleged government activity. If the superior court determines that an award of reasonable attorney fees or costs is not warranted, the judge shall issue written findings specifying the reasons for the denial. (3) If the superior court awards reasonable attorneys' fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred to the requestor, it shall order the agency or municipality to waive any fee assessed under subsection (d) of section 10. If the superior court does not award reasonable attorneys' fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred to the requestor, it may order the agency or municipality to waive any fee assessed under said subsection (d) of said section 10. Whether the superior court determines to waive any fee assessed under said subsection (d) of said section 10, it shall issue findings specifying the basis for such decision. (4) If a requestor has obtained judgment in superior court in a case under this section and has demonstrated that the defendant agency or municipality, in withholding or failing to timely furnish the requested record or any portion of the record or in assessing an unreasonable fee, did not act in good faith, the superior court may assess punitive damages against the defendant agency or municipality in an amount not less than $1,000 nor more than $5,000, to be deposited into the Public Records Assistance Fund established in section 35DDD of chapter 10.
(e) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the attorney general may, at any time, file a complaint in Suffolk superior court with respect to agencies and, with respect to municipalities, in the superior court in the county in which the municipality is located, to ensure compliance with this chapter and may further intervene as of right in any action filed in accordance with this section. In any action filed or in which the attorney general has intervened under this subsection, paragraphs (1) and (4) of subsection (d) shall apply and any public records the court orders produced shall be provided without a fee.
Jenna L. Correia
Department Assistant III
Town of Wareham Clerk's Office
508-291-3100 x 3142
From: Jenna Correia
Good afternoon ?
I reviewed your website today and see several emails that were sent by MuckRock to the Town of Wareham. In checking with the Records Officer, many of the emails sent by MuckRock have not been received by our office. I see follow up emails dated 4/26/17, 5/11/17, 5/26/17 and yesterday 6/12/17.
Can you please let me know what email address you are sending/addressing your requests too?
Thank you.
Jenna L. Correia
Department Assistant III
Town of Wareham Clerk's Office
508-291-3100 x 3142
Disclaimer
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out more visit the Mimecast website.
From: Caitlin Russell
I've been sending requests to selectmen@wareham.ma.us. Is that the proper email address?
Also, a check for $33.75 was mailed last week, and should be arriving shortly if it hasn't already.
Caitlin
From: Jenna Correia
Hi Caitlin
The Records Access Officer for the Town of Wareham is Mary Ann Silva, Town Clerk. The proper address is clerk@wareham.ma.us. The Board of Selectman are not in charge of public records requests.
Any requests for information from the water or fire districts for both Wareham and Onset would go directly to that district. The districts are separate from the Town and they handle their own public requests. You can find contact information on their websites.
We did receive your payment yesterday in the amount of $33.75 and we are compiling the emails as requested. I will be back in touch soon with that information as well as updates and/or information on the other requests you have submitted.
Thank you.
Jenna L. Correia
Department Assistant III
Town of Wareham Clerk's Office
508-291-3100 x 3142
From: Caitlin Russell
Hello,
Is your office also handling my request for civilian complaints filed against the Wareham Police Department?
From: Mary Ann Silva
Caitlin,
We make sure that all information is forwarded to the proper department.
Mary Ann Silva
Wareham Town Clerk
From: Caitlin Russell
Thank you Mrs. Silva!
Regarding the request for complaints filed against Wareham police officers, I received a list of complaints that appeared to have been compiled specifically to fill my request. Would it be possible to get the original complaints in full? Thank you!
Best,
Caitlin
From: Mary Ann Silva
Caitlin,
We are in the process of obtaining all complaints. However, it will take some time to make all copies and
to ensure the privacy of individuals names, i.e, minors, possibly named in the complaint.
Mary Ann Silva
Wareham Town Clerk
From: Caitlin Russell
Thank you. I understand that the names of minors might be redacted, but if the names of officers or complainants are redacted,I will be appealing those redactions to the Massachusetts Supervisor of Records office.
In addition, I would appreciate if you'd remind whoever is compiling the records that when they do redact any information, they are legally obligated to cite the Public Records Law exemption that allows them to do so. I don't say this to single out Wareham, I've just found that numerous municipalities have employees that are unfamiliar with this law. Mostly lower level employees; I have every confidence in your knowledge of the law.
When I didn't receive an answer Friday I filed an appeal, but I'll let the state know that I jumped the gun on that. Thank you for all your help!
Best,
Caitlin Russell
From: Mary Ann Silva
Caitlin,
I can assure you that as the RAO I am very well aware of the law. Also, although Jenna answers the initial requests, I am
copied on all request and kept abreast of what is transpiring.
We also run most request by our Town Counsel to assure all requesters that we are abiding by the law as it is written.
I can't account for other Towns, but I have read and re-read the public records law. What I am not sure of, again, I
consult with out Town Counsel.
We are working on this request, as according to my records was received on June 15, 2017. We did respond as we
felt was appropriate. Unfortunately, this information is not in my direct custody and I must work with the Department
that actually has custody of these records.
As soon as we have the information requested, you will be the first one notified if there is a cost associated with this
request and all reasons if any information that is redacted.
We are not opened on Friday. However, I did respond, as well as Jenna, prior to Friday to let you know that we were
working on your request.
It is your right to contact the state if you feel you are not being treated fairly. However, when and if they contact my
office, I will share all correspondents we have had with you regarding all requests and answers during these past
several weeks.
Always,
Mary Ann Silva
Wareham Town Clerk
From: Caitlin Russell
Thank you.
You're welcome to share anything you'd like with the Supervisor, but I included all of our correspondence in my appeal, including the Thursday emails. I had forgotten that Wareham Town Hall is closed on Fridays, as that's not the norm in most towns. Thank you for the reminder, I'll be sure to remember in the future.
Best,
Caitlin
From: Mary Ann Silva
Caitlin,
I just met with our Town Counsel and Lt. Walcek regarding your request for copies of the complaints
regarding the Police Department.
Richard Bowen, Town Counsel, was personally handed the 64 pages of complaints. He will segregate
all parts of the public record that are exempt from disclosure and will provide the exemption regulating
the redaction. He will deliver the redacted complaints on Tuesday of next week.
Also, it was brought to my attention that the emails you had requested, which were segregated by
Town Counsel, have been completed. The original good faith estimate was $19.80 higher than it
should have been. Also, Attorney Bowen did not charge for the time taken to segregate and redact
the records. Are you coming in to pick up these copies or do you want them mailed?
I need to know what your wishes are regarding this over payment, as we can credit the pending
request with the amount owed or if you want the emails mailed, we can deduct this cost also.
The cost for the copies of the Police complaints will come to approximately $3.20. If you want the
emails mailed, we would weigh them and notify you of the cost when you let us know your decision.
If you chose to have the total amount of $19.80 refunded, you must complete a W9 form in order
for our Town Accountant to assign you a vender number to assist us in completing this refund.
Again, please let us know what you wish to do. I will not be in on Monday, but will forward this
email to Jenna. She is my assignee during my absence.
Respectfully,
Mary Ann Silva
Wareham Town Clerk
From: Caitlin Russell
Thank you for all your help!
Can you please mail the documents to:
MuckRock Dept. 30440
411A Highland Ave.
Somerville, MA 02144
Thanks!
Caitlin
From: Wareham Board of Selectmen
A copy of documents responsive to the request.
From: Jenna Correia
To Caitlin:
I am in receipt of your email below. The cost to mail the emails to you at the address provided below would be $7.80.
Please confirm that you want them mailed. If so, I can put them in today's mail and will deduct the cost from the original estimate. By mailing these, the Town of Wareham will then owe a refund of $12.00 to MuckRock.
Town Counsel is still reviewing the documents for the Police Complaints and will be providing those to us tomorrow. Once we have the information I can provide you an estimate for the cost of those copies and the cost to have them mailed. Once an estimate is compiled and provided to you, you can advise us how you wish to proceed with the credit. (Either apply to new estimate or refund money.)
Please be reminded that if you would like a refund, you must complete a W9 form in order for our Town Accountant to assign you a vendor number to assist us in completing this refund. I can email that form to you should you wish to have the refund sent.
Thank you.
Jenna L. Correia
Department Assistant III
Town of Wareham Clerk's Office
508-291-3100 x 3142
From: Caitlin Russell
I would like them mailed. Thank you!
From: Richard Bowen
Caitlin,
I just spent 3 hours going through the requested records and am still not finished. Today I was able to deliver some of them to the Town Clerk's office for you. However, there is more work for me to do.
I'd appreciate it if you could give us an extension through 7/11. That would allow me to waive the expense of my time because it means that I can fit the review in around other work.
Thank you for your courtesy.
Rich
Richard Bowen
Town Counsel
From: Jenna Correia
To: Caitlin
I am following up on Attorney Bowen's email that he sent on Thursday 6/29/17. Did you receive that correspondence?
Also, can you please confirm what email address we all should be using to reach you? It seems there are a couple being used by MuckRock.com and we want to be sure we are responding to the correct email/request. I have been periodically checking your website to make sure the information we are providing is posted because you have indicated it’s publicly available on MuckRock.com. and it seems some of our responses/replies with information have not been posted to your website. I just want to be sure the information we are providing, as requested, is getting to you.
Thank you.
Jenna L. Correia
Department Assistant III
Town of Wareham Clerk's Office
508-291-3100 x 3142
From: Richard Bowen
Dear Caitlin,
Jenna has informed me that you have inquired about the basis for the redactions in the Police documents. The redactions were based on Exemptions (a) (c) and (f).
Please note that there were fewer redactions in the report relative to the "cell phone/video" report. This is because the incident was highly publicized, and the participants waived confidentiality rights through self publication. Nonetheless, CORI related material has been redacted.
Best wishes for a pleasant summer!
Rich Bowen
You have the right to appeal a determination to the Secretary of State's Office as per the Secretary's regulatory guidelines.
________________________________
---
On June 22, 2017:
Caitlin,
I just met with our Town Counsel and Lt. Walcek regarding your request for copies of the complaints
regarding the Police Department.
Richard Bowen, Town Counsel, was personally handed the 64 pages of complaints. He will segregate
all parts of the public record that are exempt from disclosure and will provide the exemption regulating
the redaction. He will deliver the redacted complaints on Tuesday of next week.
Also, it was brought to my attention that the emails you had requested, which were segregated by
Town Counsel, have been completed. The original good faith estimate was $19.80 higher than it
should have been. Also, Attorney Bowen did not charge for the time taken to segregate and redact
the records. Are you coming in to pick up these copies or do you want them mailed?
I need to know what your wishes are regarding this over payment, as we can credit the pending
request with the amount owed or if you want the emails mailed, we can deduct this cost also.
The cost for the copies of the Police complaints will come to approximately $3.20. If you want the
emails mailed, we would weigh them and notify you of the cost when you let us know your decision.
If you chose to have the total amount of $19.80 refunded, you must complete a W9 form in order
for our Town Accountant to assign you a vender number to assist us in completing this refund.
Again, please let us know what you wish to do. I will not be in on Monday, but will forward this
email to Jenna. She is my assignee during my absence.
Respectfully,
Mary Ann Silva
Wareham Town Clerk
---
On June 21, 2017:
Thank you.
You're welcome to share anything you'd like with the Supervisor, but I included all of our correspondence in my appeal, including the Thursday emails. I had forgotten that Wareham Town Hall is closed on Fridays, as that's not the norm in most towns. Thank you for the reminder, I'll be sure to remember in the future.
Best,
Caitlin
---
On June 21, 2017:
Caitlin,
I can assure you that as the RAO I am very well aware of the law. Also, although Jenna answers the initial requests, I am
copied on all request and kept abreast of what is transpiring.
We also run most request by our Town Counsel to assure all requesters that we are abiding by the law as it is written.
I can't account for other Towns, but I have read and re-read the public records law. What I am not sure of, again, I
consult with out Town Counsel.
We are working on this request, as according to my records was received on June 15, 2017. We did respond as we
felt was appropriate. Unfortunately, this information is not in my direct custody and I must work with the Department
that actually has custody of these records.
As soon as we have the information requested, you will be the first one notified if there is a cost associated with this
request and all reasons if any information that is redacted.
We are not opened on Friday. However, I did respond, as well as Jenna, prior to Friday to let you know that we were
working on your request.
It is your right to contact the state if you feel you are not being treated fairly. However, when and if they contact my
office, I will share all correspondents we have had with you regarding all requests and answers during these past
several weeks.
Always,
Mary Ann Silva
Wareham Town Clerk
---
On June 21, 2017:
Thank you. I understand that the names of minors might be redacted, but if the names of officers or complainants are redacted,I will be appealing those redactions to the Massachusetts Supervisor of Records office.
In addition, I would appreciate if you'd remind whoever is compiling the records that when they do redact any information, they are legally obligated to cite the Public Records Law exemption that allows them to do so. I don't say this to single out Wareham, I've just found that numerous municipalities have employees that are unfamiliar with this law. Mostly lower level employees; I have every confidence in your knowledge of the law.
When I didn't receive an answer Friday I filed an appeal, but I'll let the state know that I jumped the gun on that. Thank you for all your help!
Best,
Caitlin Russell
---
On June 20, 2017:
Caitlin,
We are in the process of obtaining all complaints. However, it will take some time to make all copies and
to ensure the privacy of individuals names, i.e, minors, possibly named in the complaint.
Mary Ann Silva
Wareham Town Clerk
---
On June 15, 2017:
Thank you Mrs. Silva!
Regarding the request for complaints filed against Wareham police officers, I received a list of complaints that appeared to have been compiled specifically to fill my request. Would it be possible to get the original complaints in full? Thank you!
Best,
Caitlin
---
On June 15, 2017:
Caitlin,
We make sure that all information is forwarded to the proper department.
Mary Ann Silva
Wareham Town Clerk
---
On June 15, 2017:
Hello,
Is your office also handling my request for civilian complaints filed against the Wareham Police Department?
---
On June 14, 2017:
Hi Caitlin
The Records Access Officer for the Town of Wareham is Mary Ann Silva, Town Clerk. The proper address is clerk@wareham.ma.us. The Board of Selectman are not in charge of public records requests.
Any requests for information from the water or fire districts for both Wareham and Onset would go directly to that district. The districts are separate from the Town and they handle their own public requests. You can find contact information on their websites.
We did receive your payment yesterday in the amount of $33.75 and we are compiling the emails as requested. I will be back in touch soon with that information as well as updates and/or information on the other requests you have submitted.
Thank you.
Jenna L. Correia
Department Assistant III
Town of Wareham Clerk's Office
508-291-3100 x 3142
---
On June 14, 2017:
I've been sending requests to selectmen@wareham.ma.us. Is that the proper email address?
Also, a check for $33.75 was mailed last week, and should be arriving shortly if it hasn't already.
Caitlin
---
On June 13, 2017:
Good afternoon ?
I reviewed your website today and see several emails that were sent by MuckRock to the Town of Wareham. In checking with the Records Officer, many of the emails sent by MuckRock have not been received by our office. I see follow up emails dated 4/26/17, 5/11/17, 5/26/17 and yesterday 6/12/17.
Can you please let me know what email address you are sending/addressing your requests too?
Thank you.
Jenna L. Correia
Department Assistant III
Town of Wareham Clerk's Office
508-291-3100 x 3142
Disclaimer
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out more visit the Mimecast website.
---
On April 6, 2017:
To: Caitlin
Please refer to my response dated 3/29/17 regarding your public request submitted on 12/2/16.
I have inserted the email for your reference as well as attached a copy.
To Caitlin:
I am writing on behalf of Records Access Officer ("RAO") Mary Ann Silva in connection with your public request dated 12/2/16 for:
"-Any and all emails between any and all members of the Wareham Board of Selectmen from April 2013 to Dec. 2016 containing keywords and phrases “sewer”, “sewerage”, “Inter-municipal agreement”, “sewer commission”, “sewer commissioners”, “indirect costs”, “independent counsel”, “Guy Campinha”, and “Marilyn Jordan.”
From: Caitlin Russell
Hello,
Can you please re-send the documents with each redaction marked according to which exemption applies to each specific redaction? Thank you.
From: Richard Bowen
Caitlin,
I believe that our previous response satisfies our obligations under the law.
Today's request will take approximately three hours of my time at the rate of $175 per hour for a total of $525.
By a copy of this to Jenna, I am asking her to inform me when payment has been made so that I can commence work.
You have the right to appeal a determination to the Secretary of State's Office as per the Secretary's regulatory guidelines.
Rich Bowen
Town Counsel
From: Caitlin Russell
What I'm requesting should have been done when the document was originally redacted. If someone misunderstood their obligation under the public records law and failed to properly cite exemptions, that's not the fault of the requester and should not require the requester to be penalized with excessive charges. Please let me know if your office will re-send properly redacted records.
From: Richard Bowen
Caitlin,
Kindly see my previous reply, which you have included in your message below.
We have waived or reduced fees for you on repeated occasions. However, we will not be doing so every time, and will be requiring payment on this request. The fee reflects the minimum cost for the time to reply to your request, and in fact, is likely an underestimate. However, if the request can be satisfied in less time, the payment will be refunded proportionally.
You have the right to appeal a determination to the Secretary of State's Office as per the Secretary's regulatory guidelines.
Rich Bowen
Town Counsel
Files
pages