Michael Dreslinski v. Office of the District Attorney - Worcester District (SPR 20170315)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records March 21, 2017 SPR17/315 Lindsay Corcoran Records Access Officer Office of the Worcester County District Attorney Worcester Trial Court 225 Main Street, G301 Worcester, MA 01608 Dear Ms. Corcoran: I have received the petition of Michael P. Dreslinski appealing the response of the Office of the Worcester County District Attorney (District Attorney) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § lOA; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, on January 31, 2017 Mr. Dreslinski requested all records from January 1, 2005 through January 1, 2017 regarding Michael Dreslinski. The District Attorney did not properly respond to Mr. Dreslinski's January 2017 public records request, your office merely provided Mr. Dreslinski with a copy of a December 22, 2016 response to his previous 2016 request. Mr. Dreslinski appealed. Appeal to the Supervisor It is my understanding that Mr. Dreslinski did not provide the District Attorney with a copy of his petition to the Supervisor of Records. A Public Records Division staff member provided a copy of the petition for your review and to assist the District Attorney in drafting a proper response to the request. Mr. Dreslinski is reminded that under the new requirements in the Public Records Law, when petitioning the Supervisor for an appeal, the requester shall provide a copy of such petition to the RAO associated with such petition. 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1)(h) (2017 ed.). The Public Records Law The Public Records Law strongly favors disclosure by creating a presumption that all governmental records are public records. G. L. c. 66, § lOA(d); 950 C.M.R. 32.03(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 sec.state.ma.us/pre• pre@sec.state.ma.us

Lindsay Corcoran SPR17/315 Page 2 March 21, 2017 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, § lO(b)(iv), 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). 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. If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 1O (b )(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. 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. Public Records Division attorneys are available during regular business hours to answer general questions regarding the Public Records Law. In addition, Public Records Division staff will visit a records custodian in person to conduct training workshops on the Public Records Law upon request. Please contact the Public Records Division directly at the telephone number provided in this determination for further information. On March 21, 201 7 this office was informed that the District Attorney provided Mr. Dreslinski with a written response to his January 31, 2017 public records request. Accordingly, whereas this appeal was opened due to a non-response and that a response has now been provided by the District Attorney, I will consider this appeal closed. Mr. Dreslinski may appeal the substantive nature of the District Attorney's response within ninety (90) calendar days. 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Michael P. Dreslinski