Seeking all emails sent or received by Delores Hamilton or Maritsa Barros which contain any of the following phrases, "Diversity in Hiring", "Policy 44", and/or "Policy Number".
Dates to search 9/1/2020 to 10/1/2021.
Attached please find the responsive documents for your request.
Please note the following:
Redacted: 1 email-chain
containing both Medical and Personnel
information under:
Exemption
(c) personnel and medical files or information; also any other
materials or data relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure
of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c).
The privacy exemption is made up of two separate clauses,
the first of which exempts personnel and medical files. As a general rule,
medical information will always be of a sufficiently personal nature to warrant
exemption.
The second clause of the privacy exemption applies to
requests for records that implicate privacy interests. Its application is
limited to “intimate details of a highly personal nature” such as marital
status, paternity, substance abuse, government assistance, family disputes and
reputation.
Redacted: 1 email
containing Identification Numbers
and Passwords under:
Exemption
(b) related solely to internal personnel rules and
practices of the government unit, provided however, that such records shall be
withheld only to the extent that proper performance of necessary governmental
functions requires such withholding
G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(b).
The proper performance of necessary City functions will be
inhibited by disclosure.
Withheld: 3
individual emails (each with a corresponding policy attachment) as Personnel Records under:
Exemption
(c) personnel and medical files or information; also any other
materials or data relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure
of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c).
Withholding serves to protect the City’s ability to function
effectively as an employer and release of certain personnel information could
disrupt the City’s capability to conduct sensitive and careful investigations
regarding employees. Personnel information that is useful in making employment
decisions regarding an employee is sufficiently personal to be exempt pursuant
to the first clause. Such information includes employment
applications, employee work evaluations, disciplinary documentation, and
promotion, demotion, or termination information.
The
subject matters and details of the withheld emails include, but are not limited
to, advisement or the confirmation of, Bridging of Service, CBAs, disciplinary
action including termination, vacation accruals, longevity, wages and stipends,
comp-time, etc., in relation to specifically identified individuals and their
personnel files, which falls under the above exemption.
Withheld: 1
email-chain with 2 attachments, and 1 email with 1 attachment, as Drafts for future meeting(s) and on-going
Union CBA negotiations under:
Exemption (d) – The Deliberative Process Exemption inter-agency
or intra-agency memoranda or letters relating to policy positions being
developed by the agency; but this subclause shall not apply to reasonably completed
factual studies or reports on which the development of such policy positions
has been or may be based G.
L. c. 4, § 7(26)(d).
The exemption is intended to avoid
release of materials that could taint the deliberative process if prematurely
disclosed such as recommendations on legal and policy matters found within an
ongoing deliberative process.
In addition, two (2) email
communications with the City Solicitor’s Office have been withheld, under the common law
attorney-client privileged recognized in Suffolk Construction v. DCAM, 449
Mass. 444 (2007), which were made in
confidence between the City and its counsel for the purposes of seeking/giving
legal advice.
The
response below is made to provide “a detailed description of the
attorney-client privileged records, including the names of the authors and
recipients of the advice; the date of the communication; the substance of the
record; and the grounds upon which the attorney-client privilege is being
claimed.”
The following information is provided
regarding the responsive records to PRR 2021-2015:
Date(s)
Author(s)
Recipient(s)
Substance
Grounds for Privilege
Email chain – 01/27/2021 – 04/29/2021 (2 emails)
Dolores Hamilton, Human Resources Director (DH)
Christopher Petrini - City Solicitor, City of Framingham (CP), Christopher
Brown, Attorney - City Solicitor’s Office (CB), Susan Embree – Administrative
Assistant & Records Access Officer (SE)
Seeking legal advice regarding employment reference checks
Communication between attorney and client made in confidence for
purposes of seeking/giving legal advice for which the privilege has not been
waived
Email – 05/18/2021
Dolores Hamilton, Human Resources Director (DH)
Christopher Petrini - City Solicitor, City of Framingham (CP), Christopher
Brown, Attorney - City Solicitor’s Office (CB)
Seeking legal advice regarding an internal investigation
Communication between attorney and client made in confidence for
purposes of giving legal advice for which the privilege has not been waived
You have a
right to appeal this response to the Supervisor of Public Records pursuant to
G.L. c. 66, §10A(a) or
to file an action in Superior Court pursuant to G.L. c. 66, §10A(c).
The balance of the responsive emails, including
all of their attachments, are provided in this request.
Request Date
2021-11-05
Agency Tracking
2021-2015
Acquisition Notes
This record was automatically imported from https://www.townforms.com/FOIADirect-FraminghamMACitizens/
Seeking all emails sent or received by Delores Hamilton or Maritsa Barros which contain any of the following phrases, "Diversity in Hiring", "Policy 44", and/or "Policy Number".
Dates to search 9/1/2020 to 10/1/2021.
Attached please find the responsive documents for your request.
Please note the following:
Redacted: 1 email-chain
containing both Medical and Personnel
information under:
Exemption
(c) personnel and medical files or information; also any other
materials or data relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure
of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c).
The privacy exemption is made up of two separate clauses,
the first of which exempts personnel and medical files. As a general rule,
medical information will always be of a sufficiently personal nature to warrant
exemption.
The second clause of the privacy exemption applies to
requests for records that implicate privacy interests. Its application is
limited to “intimate details of a highly personal nature” such as marital
status, paternity, substance abuse, government assistance, family disputes and
reputation.
Redacted: 1 email
containing Identification Numbers
and Passwords under:
Exemption
(b) related solely to internal personnel rules and
practices of the government unit, provided however, that such records shall be
withheld only to the extent that proper performance of necessary governmental
functions requires such withholding
G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(b).
The proper performance of necessary City functions will be
inhibited by disclosure.
Withheld: 3
individual emails (each with a corresponding policy attachment) as Personnel Records under:
Exemption
(c) personnel and medical files or information; also any other
materials or data relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure
of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c).
Withholding serves to protect the City’s ability to function
effectively as an employer and release of certain personnel information could
disrupt the City’s capability to conduct sensitive and careful investigations
regarding employees. Personnel information that is useful in making employment
decisions regarding an employee is sufficiently personal to be exempt pursuant
to the first clause. Such information includes employment
applications, employee work evaluations, disciplinary documentation, and
promotion, demotion, or termination information.
The
subject matters and details of the withheld emails include, but are not limited
to, advisement or the confirmation of, Bridging of Service, CBAs, disciplinary
action including termination, vacation accruals, longevity, wages and stipends,
comp-time, etc., in relation to specifically identified individuals and their
personnel files, which falls under the above exemption.
Withheld: 1
email-chain with 2 attachments, and 1 email with 1 attachment, as Drafts for future meeting(s) and on-going
Union CBA negotiations under:
Exemption (d) – The Deliberative Process Exemption inter-agency
or intra-agency memoranda or letters relating to policy positions being
developed by the agency; but this subclause shall not apply to reasonably completed
factual studies or reports on which the development of such policy positions
has been or may be based G.
L. c. 4, § 7(26)(d).
The exemption is intended to avoid
release of materials that could taint the deliberative process if prematurely
disclosed such as recommendations on legal and policy matters found within an
ongoing deliberative process.
In addition, two (2) email
communications with the City Solicitor’s Office have been withheld, under the common law
attorney-client privileged recognized in Suffolk Construction v. DCAM, 449
Mass. 444 (2007), which were made in
confidence between the City and its counsel for the purposes of seeking/giving
legal advice.
The
response below is made to provide “a detailed description of the
attorney-client privileged records, including the names of the authors and
recipients of the advice; the date of the communication; the substance of the
record; and the grounds upon which the attorney-client privilege is being
claimed.”
The following information is provided
regarding the responsive records to PRR 2021-2015:
Date(s)
Author(s)
Recipient(s)
Substance
Grounds for Privilege
Email chain – 01/27/2021 – 04/29/2021 (2 emails)
Dolores Hamilton, Human Resources Director (DH)
Christopher Petrini - City Solicitor, City of Framingham (CP), Christopher
Brown, Attorney - City Solicitor’s Office (CB), Susan Embree – Administrative
Assistant & Records Access Officer (SE)
Seeking legal advice regarding employment reference checks
Communication between attorney and client made in confidence for
purposes of seeking/giving legal advice for which the privilege has not been
waived
Email – 05/18/2021
Dolores Hamilton, Human Resources Director (DH)
Christopher Petrini - City Solicitor, City of Framingham (CP), Christopher
Brown, Attorney - City Solicitor’s Office (CB)
Seeking legal advice regarding an internal investigation
Communication between attorney and client made in confidence for
purposes of giving legal advice for which the privilege has not been waived
You have a
right to appeal this response to the Supervisor of Public Records pursuant to
G.L. c. 66, §10A(a) or
to file an action in Superior Court pursuant to G.L. c. 66, §10A(c).
The balance of the responsive emails, including
all of their attachments, are provided in this request.
Request Date
2021-11-05
Agency Tracking
2021-2015
Acquisition Notes
This record was automatically imported from https://www.townforms.com/FOIADirect-FraminghamMACitizens/