Haley, Robert v. Lowell, City of - Law Department (SPR 20150700)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division

Shawn A. Williams Supervisor of Records

October 19, 2015 SPR15/700

Mr. Elliott J. Veloso, Esq. Assistant City Solicitor

City of Lowell - Law Department 375 Merrimack Street, 3°° Floor Lowell, MA 01852

Dear Attorney Veloso:

I have received the petition of Robert Haley appealing the response of the City of Lowell Law Department (Department) to his request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § 10(b); see also 950 C.M.R, 32.08(2). Specifically, Mr. Haley requested an unredacted copy of a citizen complaint. The Department provided a copy of the complaint, redacted to omit identifying information regarding the complainant. In its response the Department cited the deliberative process exemption to justify these redactions. G. L. c. 4, § 7 (26) (d).

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).

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),

Exemption (f)

In a supplemental response dated September 21, 2015, subsequent to the opening of this appeal, the Department also Exemption (f). Exemption (f), the “investigatory” exemption, permits the withholding of:

www.sec.state.ma.us/pre

Mr. Elliott, J. Veloso, Esq. SPR15/700 Page Two October 19, 2015

investigatory materials necessarily compiled out of the public view by law enforcement or other investigatory officials the disclosure of which materials would probably so prejudice the possibility of effective law enforcement that such disclosure would not be in the public interest

G. L. c. 4, §7 (26)

A custodian of records generally must demonstrate a prejudice to investigative efforts in order to withhold requested records. An investigative agency is not required to demonstrate prejudice to withhold the identities of voluntary witnesses, informants, or complainants. Reinstein v. Police Commissioner of Boston, 378 Mass. 281, 290 n.18 (1979),

The record provided was redacted by the Department to omit information regarding a voluntary complainant. I find the Department acted within its discretion in making such redactions to the responsive record. Accordingly, I will consider this administrative appeal : closed.

urs,

“. Shawn'A. Williams Supervisor of Records

ce: Mr. Robert Haley