Michael Dreslinski v. Holden, Town of - Fire Department (SPR 20160205)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Shawn A. Williams Supervisor ofR ecords April 6, 2016 SPR16/205 Chief John Chandler Town of Holden-Fire Department 13 70 Main Street Holden, MA 01520 Dear Chief Chandler: I have received the petition of Michael Dreslinski appealing the response of Town of Holden Fire 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 of Department records related to him. In a response dated January 5, 2016 the Department provided Mr. Dreslinski with a good faith fee estimate for the provision of records responsive to his request. In its January 5 response the Department informed Mr. Dreslinski that the Criminal Information Records Information (CORI) Unit of the Massachusetts Department of Public Safety requires his request to be confirmed in writing by his "Case Worker" so that the Department can be assured that the requested records (regarding a criminal matter) are not being sent to an unauthorized person or imposter. Thereupon, Mr. Dreslinski submitted his petition challenging the Department's requirement that he provide "proof of identification" to access the records he requested. Please be advised a custodian may not require proof of the requester's identity prior to complying with requests for copies of public records. 950 C.M.R. 32.05(5). In addition, the personal status of a requester does not afford any greater right of access to the requested information than other persons in the general public. The Public Records Law does not distinguish between requesters. Access to a record requested pursuant to the Public Records Law rests on the content of the record and not the circumstances of the requester. See Bougas v. Chief of Police of Lexington, 371 Mass. 59, 64 (1976). As a result, an individual's consent to release a record has no bearing on the public status of the record. 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 OneAshburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 · (617) 727-2832 ·Fax (617) 727-5914 www.sec.state.ma.us/pre

Chief John Chandler SPR16/205 Page 2 April 6, 2016 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). Public records and any non-exempt, segregable portions thereof, are subject to mandatory disclosure upon request. G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); see also Reinstein v. Police Comm'r of Boston, 378 Mass. 281, 289-90 (1979) (the statutory exemptions are not blanket in nature). In the event the Department determines any of the requested records are exempt from disclosure 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 Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995). 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 the requested records. Should Mr. Dreslinski make a request pursuant to G. L. c. 6, § 172 for records considered CORI, he may have a right of access to those records exempt from disclosure under the Public Records Law. While the CORI Act does provide for certain individuals to have access to CORI, it is not within the jurisdiction of this office to make the determination as to which individuals will be provided access. Accordingly, whereas the Department has not overcome the presumption that the requested records are public, the Department is hereby ordered, upon payment of the estimated fee, 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. To assist in requesting and responding to requests for public records please refer to our publication, A Guide to the Massachusetts Public Records Law. This document is 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 Public Records Law upon request. Please contact my office directly at the telephone number provided in this determination for further information.

Chief John Chandler SPR16/205 Page 3 April 6, 2016 r ofRecords cc: Michael Dreslinski