Beaudet, Mike v. Executive Office of Public Safety and Security - Department of State Police (SPR 20140441)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Shawn A. Williams Supervisor ofR ecords October 27, 2014 SPR14/441 Mr. Michael B. Halpin, Esq. Department of State Police Office of the Chief Legal Counsel 470 Worcester Road Framingham, MA 01702 Dear Chief Legal Counsel Halpin: This office has received the petition of Mike Beaudet appealing the response of the Department of State Police (Department) to his request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(6). Specifically, Mr. Beaudet requested a copy of a 2002 investigative report regarding a specifically identified State Police Academy candidate. The Public Records Law strongly favors disclosure by creating a presumption that all governmental records are public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); 950 C.M.R. 32.08(4). "Public records" is broadly defined to include all documentary materials or data, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by any officer or employee of any town of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). In a June 13, 2014 response letter to Mr. Beaudet, you stated that the Department was withholding the responsive record pursuant to Exemptions (c) and (f) of the Public Records Law. In response to my order dated October 7, 2014, you provided this office with an unredacted copy of the responsive record in order to conduct an in camera review to determine the applicability of the Department's exemption claim. The applicability of Exemption (c) is first considered. Exemption (c) 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 OneAshburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 · (617) 727-2832 ·Fax (617) 727-5914 www.sec.state.ma. us/pre

Mr. Michael B. Halpin, Esq. SPR14/441 Page Two October 27, 2014 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 of Wakefield, 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 Association v. School Committee ofWakefield, 431 Mass. 792,798 (2000). It is the burden of the records custodian to demonstrate the application of an exemption in order to withhold a requested record. G. L. c. 66, § 10 (c ); see also District Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). In an August 20, 2014 telephone conversation with an attorney on my staff, you stated that the responsive record was created as the result of a background investigation conducted by the Department of a prospective employee. Furthermore, you confirmed that the Department generally conducts background investigations of candidates for employment and that the responsive record was created as part of the investigation into this specifically identified candidate. The responsive record is considered part of the candidate's employment application and in this instance the record was useful to the Department in making an employment decision regarding this individual. See Wakefield at 798. Accordingly, the Department considers the report to be a personnel record. Upon my in camera review of the responsive record, it is my finding that the Department may permissibly withhold the responsive record pursuant to the first clause of Exemption (c). The responsive record directly relates to the individual's application for employment with the Department. Furthermore, the record is evaluative in nature and falls within the core categories of information that the first clause of this exemption is designed to protect. Please be advised that the applicability of this exemption with respect to personnel records is not restricted to only instances where an individual is ultimately hired by a prospective employer. Whereas the Department may permissibly withhold the responsive record pursuant to Exemption (c), an analysis as to the applicability of Exemption (f) is not required. Accordingly, this administrative appeal is now closed. Supervisor of Records cc: Mr. Mike Beaudet