Lisa Linhardt v. Office of the District Attorney - Middlesex District (SPR 20171040)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records August 11,2017 SPRl7/1040 Sandra Weisberger, Esq. Assistant District Attorney Office of the District Attorney Middlesex District - 15 Commonwealth Avenue Woburn, MA 01 801 Dear Attorney Weisberger: I have received the petition of Lisa Linhardt appealing the response of the Middlesex District Attorney's Office (DAO) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, 5 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, on April 7,2017, Ms. Linhardt requested "all communications through letter, email, text messages, appointments that were held, and a log of telephone calls between the Middlesex County DA Office and" an identified family "surrounding the criminal complaint made in August 20 15. " In a response dated May 15,201 7, the DAO denied her request, claiming that the responsive record had already been provided. Unsatisfied with the DAO's response, Ms. Linhardt petitioned this Office and this appeal, SPR1711040, was opened as a result. 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, § 10A(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, 9 lO(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 5 11 (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. 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

Sandra Weisberger, Esq. Page 2 August 11,2017 If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, 5 lO(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. The DAO's May lfhre sponse In its May 15 thr esponse, the DAO indicated that ". . . this Office received your public records request, by mail, on April 7,2017 . . . ." The DAO also indicated that "this Office provided you with records pertaining to the 'complaint filed against [the family] in AugustISeptember 20 16' in response to your January 9,20 17 public records request." You further indicated that "[tlhe information you are requesting today appears to be contained in the documentation that has been previously provided to you." You explained, "[tlhe January responses included communications between this Office and members of' the family and because "[tlhere has been no addition to the documentation relating to the [family's] investigation between January 2017 and today, this Office does not intend to reproduce the information previously provided to you." Subsequent to the intervention by a member of my staff, I learned that the DAO intends to provide an electronic copy of the responsive record to Ms. Linhardt. An electronic copy of the responsive record was provided to this office. Accordingly, I will consider this administrative appeal closed. Sincerely, U Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Lisa Linhardt