Thomas Relihan v. Abington, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20171718)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords December 21, 2017 SPR17/1718 JoAnn Gillis Records Coordinator Abington Police Department 215 Central Street Abington, MA 02351-2113 Dear Ms. Gillis: I have received the petition of Thomas Relihan of The Enterprise appealing the response of the Abington Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § IOA; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Mr. Relihan requested an identified incident report. The Department denied his request, claiming the responsive record "exempt from the Public Record category" citing Exemption ( c) of the Public Records Law and the following statutes and regulations: "MGL Cl 19 sect60A;" "MGL C 265 sect 24C;" and "M.G.L. c. 803 CMR 2.00-11.00." G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c). 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, § IOA(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, § IO(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, § I O(b )(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. 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

JoAnn Gillis SPRl 7/1718 Page 2 December 21, 2017 Specificity The Department's response indicates "[t]he record [Mr. Relihan is] requesting is not releasable for public records." The response indicates the Department's basis for denying Mr. Relihan's request as the following: "17-605-of / MGL C.4 sect7 (26)(c) - The items are of an extremely personal or medical nature;" "17-605-of / MGL Cl 19 sect60A- Juvenile information is not privy to Public Record;" "17-605-of/MGL C 265 sect 24C - Sex Crime report shall not be open to the public;" "17-605-of / M.G.L. c. 803 CMR 2.00-11.00.- CORI.'' The Public Records Law states that "the burden shall be upon the custodian to prove with specificity the exemption which applies." G. L. c. 66, § IO(b)(iv)(emphasis added); see also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Police Comm'r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); Flatley, 419 Mass. at 511. The Department's response did not contain the specificity required in a denial of access to public records. Instead, the Department's response merely cites Exemption (c) and various other statutes and regulations without any further explanation as to an exemption or exemptions' applicability to the requested records. The Department is not permitted to issue a blanket denial without providing any further information with respect to the requested records. As a result, I find that the Department failed to satisfy its burden in responding to this records request. The Department is advised that a records custodian is required to not only cite an exemption, but to specifically explain the applicability of the exemption to the requested records in order to comply with the Public Records Law and its Access Regulations. It is my understanding a Public Records Division staff member contacted you about this matter and you indicated the Department would provide a supplemental response to Mr. Relihan. Order Accordingly, the Department is hereby ordered to provide Mr. Relihan with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten business days. A copy of any such 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. Mr. Relihan may appeal the substantive nature of the Department's response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Thomas Relihan