The Massachusetts National Guard recently signed a settlement agreement with APCC that obligates the Guard to pay over $26,000 in APCC’s legal fees to settle a public records lawsuit brought by APCC. The Guard is not eager to publicize it, but this settlement agreement is a public document, and the outcome of this lawsuit is a big deal for a variety of reasons. Perhaps most significantly, it offers an important lesson for all to keep in mind if, as expected, the Guard attempts to resurrect the now-cold corpse of the multipurpose machine gun range (MPMGR) project.
In 2024, APCC had to sue the Guard on a time-sensitive request for critical public records when the Guard insisted on stonewalling. APCC’s lawsuit sought to force the Guard to produce public records about the Guard’s desperate last-ditch scheme for trying to contractually commit MPMGR federal funds in the final days before the availability of those funds expired. The Guard made that desperate effort quietly, despite EPA Region 1’s expressed opposition to the project which poses grave environmental risks to a precious Cape Cod drinking water supply.
In direct response to APCC’s lawsuit, the attorney general’s office provided some requested documents which the Guard had previously gathered but withheld. Then, following an initial court hearing, the Guard conducted a further, broader search for additional responsive records, using the search parameters proposed by APCC. Additional responsive documents, gathered through that further effort, were then made available to APCC.
After disgorging those additional documents, the Guard agreed to pay APCC’s attorneys’ fees of over $26,000 in order to settle the case. This was an important part of the relief that APCC sought in the lawsuit. By settling, the Guard avoided the risk of having the court make a formal finding that the Guard had breached the public records law, as APCC had contended. The settlement further avoided a judicial determination of whether the Guard had failed to act in good faith and should be liable for punitive damages, in addition to APCC’s attorney’s fees.
The public records law is a key tool for extracting valuable public information, but the law is not always self-effectuating. Where government entities seek to shield their actions from public view, the up-front costs of seeking court relief are high. Agencies know that many record-requesters lack the resources to go to court to force public records law compliance. That is why the outcome of this case is so important—it shows that APCC stands ready to do its part in shouldering the burdens of keeping our government accountable to its citizens on matters that concern Cape Cod’s environmental health, and we succeed when we do so. We know we are not alone.
APCC takes this opportunity to publicize the Guard’s $26,000 settlement of our public records lawsuit because everyone should understand that non-compliance with the public records law will ultimately not be tolerated. Government agencies who refuse to honor their legal obligations can expect to face legal risks, financial costs, and public embarrassment.
Having sued the Guard to great effect in this case, APCC is prepared to do so again and we hope that others will do so as well, when necessary. Agencies in general, and the Guard in particular, should take notice; the ball is in your court to comply with future public records requests or you can expect to face the consequences in a court of law.
