Billiel, Michael v. University of Massachusetts Amherst - Police Department (SPR 20150101)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Shawn A Williams Supervisor ofR ecords April 16,2015 SPR15/101 Chief John Horvath University of Massachusetts Amherst- Police Department 585 East Pleasant Street Amherst MA 01003-9600 Dear Chief Horvath: I have received the petition of Michael J. Billiel appealing the response of the University of Massachusetts Amherst -Police Department (Department) to his request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § 1O (b ); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2). Specifically, Mr. Billiel requested a copy of an audio recording, taken on September 1, 2014, of an interview related to an internal affairs investigation conducted by the Department. In a response dated January 16, 2015 the Department denied Mr. Billiel's request stating the responsive record is exempt from disclosure. In this response the Department failed to claim any exemption to the Public Records Law to justify denial of access to public records. 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). The Public Records Law states that "the burden shall be upon the custodian to prove with specificity the exemption which applies." G. L. c. 66, § 10(c) (emphasis added). See also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Police Comm'r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); see also District Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995). The response by the Department did not contain the specificity required in a denial of access to public records. Accordingly, the Department is advised that to comply with the Public Records Law and its Access Regulations it must provide specificity with respect to any denial of access to public records. This requires a records custodian to not only cite an exemption, but to specifically explain the applicability of the exemption to the requested records. It is also important to note that records related to a police internal affairs investigation are public records, subject to mandatory disclosure upon request. See Worcester Telegram & Gazette v. Chief of Police of Worcester, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 1 (2003); subsequent review denied OneAshburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108. (617) 727-2832. Fax (617) 727-5914 www.sec.state.ma. us/ pre

Chief John Horvath SPR15/101 Page Two April 16, 2015 by the Supreme Judicial Court. This is distinguished from ordinary disciplinary records. See Wakefield Teachers Ass'n v. School Comm., 431 Mass.792 (2000). Accordingly, whereas I find the Department has not satisfied its mandatory burden of specificity, the Department is hereby ordered to provide Mr. Billiel with the responsive records. If the Department maintains that any portion of the responsive records are exempt from disclosure it must within ten (1 0) days provide to Mr. Billiel a written explanation, with specificity, how a particular exemption applies to each record. This administrative appeal is now closed. Supervisor of Records cc: Mr. Michael J. Billiel