Todd Wallack v. Executive Office of Public Safety and Security - Department of State Police (SPR 20160815)

The Commonwealth ofMassachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Shawn A. Williams Supervisor ofR ecords October 18, 2016 SPR16/815 Department of State Police Office of the Chief Legal Counsel 4 70 Worcester Road Framingham, MA 01702 Dear Office of the Chief Legal Counsel: I have received the petition of Todd Wallack of The Boston Globe appealing the response of the Department of State Police (Department) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § 10(b); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2). Specifically, Mr Wallack requested a copy of"the Department's log/list of public records requests" for all years readily available. Previous appeals This request was the subject of previous appeals and determinations. See SPR15/246 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (May 14, 2015); SPR15/501 Determination of the Supervisor ofRecords (August 21, 2015); SPR15/836 Determinations of the Supervisor of Records (December 31, 2015; May 13, 20 16); SPR15/704 Determinations of the Supervisor of Records (September 19, 2016). In my May 13 determination, I declined to reverse my finding that the fee estimate for the provision of responsive records is compliant with the Public Records Law and its Access Regulations (Regulations). I also found that although the Department may withhold portions of the responsive records, it had not met its burden to withhold information identified as Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI). In my September 19 determination I ordered the Department to provide this office with an unredacted copy of a representative sample of the responsive records. The Department provided the records for in camera inspection and this appeal (SPR 16/815) was opened as a result. I would like to thank the Department for its cooperation. OneAshburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 · (617) 727-2832 ·Fax (617) 727-5914 www.sec.state.ma. us/ pre

Ms. Glenn Rooney, Esq. SPR16/815 Page2 October 18, 2016 Current Appeal In his appeal petition to this office, Mr. Wallack argues "there is no need to redact the public records log at all." In a response dated September 29,2016, the Department explains that "[g]iven the information that is logged by the Department it is not possible to discern whether any of the information in this column may be disclosed publicly without in-depth, time consuming, review of each request and the associated records" Upon in camera review of the representative sample of the responsive records as well as the Department's responses regarding this matter, I decline to reverse my finding that the fee estimate for the provision of responsive records is compliant with the Public Records Law and its Access Regulations. See 950 C.M.R. 32.03 (defining "segregation time" as the time used to redact data that is exempt from non-exempt material). Upon payment of fee the Department is hereby ordered to provide responsive records without delay. Mr. Wallack may appeal the substantive nature of the Department's response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2). The Department must include a custodial index along with the provision of any redacted records. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(7). cc: Mr. Todd Wallack