David Bixby v. Chatham, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20170368)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords March 27, 2017 SPR17/368 Chief Mark R. Pawlina Chatham Police Department 249 George Ryder Road Chatham, MA 02633 Dear Chief Pawlina: I have received the petition of David Bixby appealing the response of the Town of Chatham Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § 1 OA; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Mr. Bixby requested a series of specifically identified incident reports. In a letter dated January 20, 2017, the Department issued Mr. Bixby the responsive records in its custody. Mr. Bixby is appealing the substantive nature of this response. Previous Appeals and Determinations This request is the subject of a number of previous appeals and determinations. Most recently, see SPR16/841 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (October 18, 2016); see SPRl 6/1130 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (December 16, 2016). This office closed the latest appeal with the proviso that the Department would issue Mr. Bixby a supplemental response in addition to what it had already provided. Mr. Bixby is appealing this supplemental January 20th response on the basis that the Department, "has failed to provide [him] with the records in the format [he] has repeatedly requested." No Duty to Create Records Under the Public Records Law, the Department is not required to create a list of records or any record in response to a public records request. In addition, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See c. G. L. 66, § lO(a); 32 Op. Atty Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). The duty to comply with requests for information extends only to those records that exist and are in the custody of the custodian ofrecords at the time of the request. See G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). The Department has already provided Mr. Bixby with an extensive amount of records. Any responsive records in its custody have been disclosed to Mr. Bixby as they were in their 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

Chief Mark R. Pawlina SPRl 7/368 Page 2 March 27, 2017 existing format. A records custodian is not required to provide the requester with records in any format other than that in which it already exists. Purpose of Request; Identity of Requester In his letter of appeal, Mr. Bixby states that not only do these records pertain to him, but also that he intends to use the records for potential legal ventures. He states in his latest appeal that the records, because of the format in which they have been disclosed to him, " ... are of no use to [him]." Please note that the reason for which a requestor seeks access to or a copy of a public record 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). Accordingly, Mr. Bixby's purpose in making the request, as well as his intentions behind it, have no bearing on the public status of any existing responsive records. Subsequent to another intervention by a member of the Public Records Division staff, this office was notified that the Department has issued Mr. Bixby with all responsive records in its custody. Whereas this matter was opened based upon the Department's failure to provide a written response, I find that the Department has fulfilled its duty and I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Mr. David Bixby Ms. Jill R. Goldsmith