Dyer, Esq., Susanna v. Springfield, City of - Police Department (SPR 20140133)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Shawn A. Williams Supervisor ofR ecords May 8, 2014 SPR14/133 Mr. E. Rhett Towles, MS, Esq. Associate City Solicitor City of Springfield 36 Court Street, Room 210 Springfield, MA 01103 Dear Attorney Towles: I have received a petition from Susanna Dyer, Esq., of Ropes and Gray, LLP appealing the non-response of the City of Springfield Police Department (Department) to her request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2) (appeals process). Attorney Dyer requested copies of records related to incidents that occurred in 1984 and 1985 that led to the prosecution of a specifically identified individual. Attorney Dyer informed this office and the Department that she represents one of the parties. Response Time Attorney Dyer infonned this office that she made her request to the Department on July 25, 2013, but did not receive any written response. The City of Springfield and the City's Police Department are reminded that a record custodian has a duty to comply with a public records request as soon as is practicable, without unreasonable delay, and always within ten (10) calendar days. G. L. c. 66, § lO(a); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.05(2). The ten-day provision is a maximum, rather than a minimum time frame for complying with a public records request. Boston Globe Newspaper Company v. Commissioner of Education, 439 Mass. 124 (2003). Within ten (1 0) days of receipt of a public records request, the custodian of records must use his superior knowledge of the records to identify those records that are responsive to the request, conduct a quick search if necessary in order to identify responsive records, and send a detailed, written response. One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 · (617) 727-2832 ·Fax (617) 727-5914 www.sec.state.ma. us/ pre

Mr. E. Rhett Towles, MS, Esq. SPR14/133 Page Two May 8, 2014 By letter dated March 27, 2014, you informed Attorney Dyer and a member of my legal staff that the Department has no records in its custody that are responsive to her request. You explained that all responsive records were provided to the Office of the Hampden County District Attorney (District Attorney). It is my understanding that you asked Sergeant Roy Carter in the Records Division of the Department to search for any record that reveals the time period in which the records were given to the District Attorney. A record holder's duty to comply with requests for information extends only to those records which exist and are in his custody. See G. L. c. 4, § 7 (26). There is no obligation to create a record in response to a public records request. G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); 32 Op. Att'y Gen. 157, 165. Accordingly, whereas the Department has no records responsive to Attorney Dyer's requests, this administrative appeal is closed. Supervisor of Records cc: Susanna Dyer, Esq., Ropes and Gray, LLP Sgt. Roy Carter, Springfield Police Department