Dreslinski, Michael v. Holden, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20150751)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Shawn A. Williams Supervisor ofR ecords November 10, 2015 SPRlS/751 Chief David A. Armstrong Town of Holden Police Department 1370 Main Street Holden, MA 01520 Dear Chief Armstrong: I have received the petition of Michael Dreslinski appealing the response of The Town of Holden 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. Dreslinski requested copies ofrecords related to him that have been withheld in their entirety pursuant to any statutory exemption to the Public Records law. In a response dated August 14, 2015 the Department identified the following records it intends to withhold in their entirety pursuant to the investigatory exemption to the Public Records Law G. L. c. 4 §7(26)(f). 1. Internal activity log 6/15/07. 2. Internal email correspondence 4/4/2007 3. Internal email correspondence 4/7/2007 4. Internal email correspondence 6/15/2007 5. Inmate call lists w/notes (not dated). 6. Internal email correspondence 6/24/2007. 7. Internal email correspondence 6/24/2007. 8. Police Info Only Bulletin 4/13/2007. 9. Multi-department activity log 1/2004--/2006. 10. Audio CD w/call reports from Mass. State Police The Department's response merely recited the exemptions without explaining any nexus to the responsive 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). One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 · (617) 727-2832 ·Fax (617) 727-5914 www.sec.state.ma. us/ pre

Chief David A. Armstrong SPR15/751 Page Two November 10, 2015 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). 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 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 each of the withheld records. I find that by merely citing the language from exemptions and failing to note the application of those exemptions to responsive records the Department has yet to meet its burden of specificity in denying access to public records. Accordingly, whereas the Department has not overcome the presumption that the requested records are public, the Department is hereby ordered, within ten (10) days of this order, to provide Mr. Dreslinski with the requested 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. Dreslinski a written explanation, with specificity, how a particular exemption applies to each record. To meet the specificity requirement a custodian must not only cite an exemption, but must also state why the exemption applies to the withheld or redacted portion of the responsive record. A copy of any such response must be provided to this office. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of this response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. If there are any fees associated with this response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 1O (a); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(2) (where cost of complying with a request for public records is expected to exceed ten dollars ($1 0. 00), custodian of records shall provide written good faith estimate). Once the fees are paid, you must provide the responsive records. cc: Mr. Michael Dreslinski