Bagni, Adam v. University of Massachusetts - Dartmouth (SPR 20150908)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Shawn A. Williams Supervisor ofR ecords January 13, 2016 SPRlS/908 Mr. John Hoey Assistant Chancellor Office of the Chancellor Foster Administration Building University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth North Dartmouth, MA 02747 Dear Assistant Chancellor Hoey: I have received the petition of Adam Bagni of NBC I 0-WJ AR TV appealing the response of the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth (University) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § 10(b); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2). Specifically, Mr. Bagni requested a copy ofrecords related to an alleged incident on the University's campus. When the University failed to provide a written response within ten (1 0) days, Mr. Bagni appealed. Subsequent to the intervention of an attorney on my staff, and upon the completion of the University's investigation of the incidents, Mr. Bagni was provided with all the records responsive to his request. 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). Under the Public Records Law and the Access Regulations (Regulations) all requests for public records must be met with a response within ten (1 0) days of the request. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b); 950 C.M.R. 32.05. The response may be an offer to provide records, a fee estimate for provision of the records, or a denial. UMass is advised that all records custodians must comply with both the Public Records Law and the Regulations with respect to the timeliness of response. In its initial response the University failed to respond within ten (1 0) days. 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 its initial denial the University failed to cite any exemption. OneAshburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 · (617) 727-2832 ·Fax (617) 727-5914 www.sec.state.ma. us/ pre

Mr. John Hoey SPR15/908 Page 2 January 13, 2016 The Public Records Access Regulations (Regulations) state that a custodian of records must notify a requester of his administrative remedies in the event the custodian denies access to requested records. 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). In its initial response the University failed to notify Mr. Bagni of his administrative remedies. The Public Records Law does not distinguish between requesters. The right of requesters to inspect and obtain copies of public records is a clear statutory mandate. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); see also Bougas v. Chief of Police of Lexington, 371 Mass. 59, 64 (1976). Access to a record pursuant to the Public Records Law rests on the content of the record, not the status of the individual or entity requesting the record. It is not unusual, however, for a records custodian to refer a reporter's request to its communications department. To assist the University in responding to requests for public records I have enclosed a copy of our publication, A Guide to the Massachusetts Public Records Law. This document is also available on the Internet, free of charge, at http://www.sec.state.ma.us/pre/prepdf/guide.pdf. Attorneys on my staff are available during regular business hours to answer general questions regarding the Public Records Law. In addition, members of my staff will visit a records custodian in person to conduct training workshops on the Publ' Records Law upon request. Please contact my office directly at the telephone number pro i ed in this determination for further information. cc: Mr. Adam Bagni