Cecelia M. Mason v. Worcester Regional Transit Authority (SPR 20170877)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords July 12, 2017 SPR17/877 Michele E. Randazzo, Esq. KPLaw 101 Arch Street, Iih Floor Boston, MA 0211 0 Dear Attorney Randazzo: I have received the petition of Cecilia M. Mason appealing the response of the Worcester Regional Transit Authority (Authority) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § lOA; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Ms. Mason requested personnel and termination records relating to an identified person, including a video camera recording reviewed by the identified person. In its June 2017 response, the Authority informed Ms. Mason that it has no records responsive to her request for the identified person's personnel file, and employment termination records, including information concerning the date and time that the identified person viewed the video recording. The Authority referred Ms. Mason to Central Mass Transit Management, Inc. (CMTM), stating that the Authority is not the identified person's employer and does not have the requested personnel and termination records. It is unclear what the relationship is between the Authority and CMTM, and what records are held by each entity. 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). 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). 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

Michele Randazzo, Esq. SPR17/877 Page 2 July 12, 2017 Security camera footage In its response to the request, the Authority informed Ms. Mason that it does not have custody of the requested security camera footage from the bus driven by the identified person. The Authority's Administrator, Jonathan Church, states in the response, "if the Authority has the ability to obtain that footage from CMTM, it will be withheld pursuant to Exemption (n) of the Public Records Law." · Prior to your July 1oth conversation with an attorney in the Public Records Division, you confirmed with Mr. Church that while the Authority does not have custody of the particular security camera footage, the Authority may have a right to obtain the security camera footage from CMTM. You explained that the buses and security cameras on the buses are the property of the Authority; therefore, it is unclear why the Authority does not have a copy of the security camera footage. It is also unclear what the relationship is between the Authority and CMTM, and why the Authority does not have a copy of the security camera footage. I find that the Authority has not met its burden of specificity in responding to the request for the security camera footage under the Public Records Law. Conclusion Accordingly, I will consider this appeal closed with the proviso that the Authority provides Ms. Mason with a detailed response regarding the request for personnel and termination records, including the video camera footage, in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten (1 0) business days. A copy of any 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. Ms. Mason may appeal the substantive nature of the response within ninety (90) calendar days. 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, ~ Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Cecilia M. Mason Jonathan E. Church