650,336 @ 9:14 pm
68 HITS in 74 minutes
SECRETARY OF STATE
68 HITS in 74 minutes
SECRETARY OF STATE
Public Records Division
One Ashburton Place Room 1719
Boston, MA 02108
Dear PUBLIC RECORDS DIVISION:
Thank you for your extensive four page letter detailing to Solicitor Rumley
Again, I repeat the consistent problems with Medford City Hall:
1)No one offered me an ESTIMATE prior to informing me that the documents were available.
As the website states: Optional: I recognize that you may charge reasonable costs for copies, as well as for personnel time needed to comply with this request. If you expect costs to exceed $10.00, please provide a detailed fee estimate.] http://www.mass.gov/mtrs/contact-us/public-records-requests.html
I was not afforded an estimate in advance.
2)Medford
City Hall may be asking me to pay over one hundred dollars for
documents that I do not need. The city has not been honest with cable tv
subscribers, with citizens, the current and the past administrations
act like they are doing us a favor running the government. They want NO
participation at council meetings from citizens (the Medford Transcript
noted that I was assaulted in April of 2010 when I was scheduled to
speak at the City Council.) A former councilor who works for the
sheriff's office would be deceptive, intolerant and would say ugly
things to citizens, especially senior citizens, who came up to the
podium.
Mr.
Rumley himself got into a verbal battle with a councilor yelling at him
to "bring it on." That kind of behavior is not what we expect from
public servants; Mr. Rumley said to former Councilor Camuso that I was
"Pat Fiorello." Mr. Fiorello was a dear friend who died of
Alzheimer's. My dear aunt died of Alheimer's (I TAKE THAT COMMENT AS A DIRECT ASSAULT) It is twisted the way they do not want to
let the public know what is going on in regards to bomb sniffing dogs
that may have been removed from Medford High School or a teacher who may
have had inappropriate relations with a politician's daughter.
I
simply want the documents that I requested. No funny business. Not
giving me an estimate in advance certainly is "funny business." Five
police officers in the past year in the news, including this week, is
"funny business."
Awhile
back City Hall wanted to charge me $226.00 or so for documents
regarding what city hall pays for in advertising. I paid $26.00 and got
less than what I wanted, but City Hall Medford is secretive, we don't even have public access that we pay for.
City
Hall has cost this citizen in time and money. It is an absolute insult
for City Hall to want me to pay over one hundred dollars for documents
which should be up online for free. That I have paid thousands for
public access TV that I do not receive makes the demand for these
documents another slap in the face.
In 2008 Mark Rumley said to retired judge Marie O. Jackson-Thompson:
“The
one sentiment that I have heard that I take great exception to is that
the city is trying to limit speech,” said Rumley. “The notion the city
would censor or squelch free speech is baseless and as city solicitor I
would find any such effort repugnant.”
On or about November 16, 2008.
Seven and a half years later we have no access tv that we fund every single month. The city is intentionally and maliciously squelching free speech AND now they want monies for a surprise package of documents which very well may be worthless. That's how they play the game and it has to stop.
I formally request that the office of the Secretary of State investigate these and other practices at Medford City Hall.
Again, I have paid thousands of dollars for a product I do not receive, public access TV and the education that it is supposed to provide.
Now they are demanding monies for documents that very well could be my own public records requests.
We are not treated fairly by this administration and the previous one.
These government officials have shockingly low standards for themselves and extremely high standards for the citizens cheated by Medford city government.
I'd be happy if Mr. Rumley would put the documents about the bomb sniffing dogs and the allegations of inappropriate behavior by a former teacher online.
What is he afraid of if he boldly tells a judge that he would find such censorship repugnant? We've only been waiting seven and a half years for Mr. Rumley to put our money where his mouth is.
Thank you.
THE EDITOR
