Leggett, Doreen v. Chatham, Town of (SPR 20140245)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Shawn A. Williams Supervisor ofR ecords May 7, 2014 SPR14/245 Ms. Doreen Leggett The Cape Codder 5 N amskaket Road Orleans, MA 02653 Dear Ms. Leggett: This office has received your petition appealing the response of the Town of Chatham (Town) to your request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 1O (b ); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08( 6). Specifically, you requested copies of records relating to an investigation of a specifically named Town employee. Exemption (c) In a March 19, 2014letter from Town Counsel Michael I. Kennefick, the Town stated that it was withholding records responsive to your request pursuant to Exemption (c) of the Public Records Law. According to the Town, the responsive records are considered personnel records and relate to a disciplinary matter involving a Town employee. Exemption (c) applies to: 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). This exemption contains two distinct and independent clauses, each requiring its own analysis. Globe Newspaper Co. v. Boston Retirement Bd., 388 Mass. 427, 432-33 (1983). The first clause creates a categorical exemption for personnel and medical information. Wakefield Teachers Association v. School Committee ofWakefield, 431 Mass. 792, 798 (2000). The core categories of personnel information include employment applications, employee work evaluations, disciplinary documentation, and promotion, demotion, or termination information pertaining to a particular employee. Wakefield Teachers OneAshburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 · (617) 727-2832. Fax (617) 727-5914 www.sec.state.ma. us/pre

Ms. Doreen Leggett SPR14/245 Page Two May 7, 2014 Association v. School Committee ofWakefield, 431 Mass. 792, 798 (2000). In an April16, 2014 telephone conversation with an attorney on my staff, Town Labor Counsel John J. Clifford confirmed that records responsive to your request relate to the settlement of a disciplinary matter involving a Town employee. While the Town employee reports administratively to the Police Chief, Attorney Clifford stated that the individual is not a member of the Town's law enforcement personnel but is considered a civilian employee. In your petition to this office, you indirectly referenced a case relating to the disclosure of records specific to an internal affairs investigatory process conducted by a law enforcement agency. See Worcester Telegram & Gazette Corp. v. Chief of Police of Worcester, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 1 (2003). In the Worcester opinion, the Appeals Court of Massachusetts held that "a citizenry's full and fair assessment of a police department's internal investigation of its officers' actions promotes the core value of trust between citizens and police essential to law enforcement and the protection of constitutional rights." Worcester at 12. The Worcester decision requires separate treatment for records that may otherwise be considered personnel records, but only for those records relating to a police department or law enforcement agency internal affairs investigation. The Worcester decision does not extend the applicability of this treatment to non-law enforcement related personnel investigations. I decline to accept your position that the Town's investigation into this matter is subject to the applicability of this decision. The Town's investigation did not involve a police officer, and to extend such applicability would render the records of police department personnel, even those for employees functioning in administrative roles, subject to disclosure. The Worcester decision does not allow for such applicability to the personnel records of non-law enforcement employees. Upon a review of this matter, it is my finding that the Town may permissibly withhold responsive records pursuant to Exemption (c). Accordingly, this administrative appeal is closed. cc: Ms. Jill R. Goldsmith Mr. John J. Clifford, Esq. Mr. Michael J. Kennefick, Esq.