William C. Stafford v. Cannabis Control Commission (SPR 20192107)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Sec1·etary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords October 29, 2019 SPR19/2107 Alycia DeAngelis, Esq. Cannabis Control Commission 101 Federal Street, 13th Floor Boston, MA 02110 Dear Attorney DeAngelis: I have received the petition of Bill Stafford appealing the response of the Cannabis Control Commission (Commission/CCC) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § lOA; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Mr. Stafford requested a waiver filed by The Haven Center, Inc. with respect to its annual renewal fees for licensure and related documents. Mr. Stafford also seeks applications related to specific provisional licenses that have been issued. The Commission responded on October 3, 2019 and October 15, 2019 by providing links to certain records but also withholding others under Exemptions (a), (c), and (f) of the Public Records Law. G. L. c. 4, § 7, cl. 26(a), (c), (f); G.L. c. 6, § 172. 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). 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. Appeal In its October 3rd response the Commission provided links to Executive Summaries for 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

Alycia DeAngelis, Esq. SPR19/2107 Page 2 Octob.er 29, 2019 these licenses. Attorney Christine Baily, General Counsel of the Commission, further indicated "[t]o the extent that you are seeking additional materials, please be advised that provisional licensees remain candidates for final licensure before the Commission and as such, all application materials are subject to an ongoing investigatory review. Such materials are b9th incomplete and confidential in nature and thus are properly withheld from public disclosure under G. L. c. 4, § 7, cl. 26(a)i (c), (f) and G.L. c. 6, § 172 (CORI)." 111 In your October 15 response you indicate "[p] rovisional licensees like the Haven Center remain candidates for final licensure before the Commission and as such, all application materials submitted with the Commission are subject to ongoing investigatory review. Given that these materials are both incomplete and confidential in nature, they are withheld from public disclosure under G. L. c. 4, § 7, cl. 26(a), (c), (f) and G.L. c. 6, § 172 (CORI)." In his appeal petition Mr. Stafford indicates "[t]he CCC is withholding the waiver request (which was issued) and the provisional licenses to the Haven Center: MRN282481 on June 28, 2019 and MCN282072 and MPN281639 on July 18, 2019. As the waiver & provisional licenses were approved the citizens of Massachusetts should be able to get the information as a public record. The CCC is withholding this information." Records withheld in their entirety As discussed in a previous determination from this office involving similar issues, although it appears there may be some infonnation contained within the applications that "would probably so prejudice the possibility of effective law enforcement that such disclosure would not be in the public interest," I find it is uncertain whether all the information contained within the applications materials would be prejudicial to the Commission's investigatory efforts and therefore not in the public interest if released. See SPRl 9/0965; SPRl 9/0979 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (May 30, 2019). As a result, I find that the Commission has not met its burden of explaining with specificity how the application materials, in their entirety, are exempt from disclosure under the exemptions cited. See Reinstein v. Police Comm'r of Boston, 378 Mass. 281, 289-90 (1979) (the statutory exemptions are narrowly construed and are not blanket in nature). Any non-exempt, segregable portion of a public record is subject to mandatory disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § lO(a). The Commission must also clarify which records it is withholding. In particular, it must confirm whether it possesses a responsive waiver filed by The Haven Center, Inc. See G. L. c. 66, § lO(b)(iv) (written response must "identify any records, categories ofrecords or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based ... "). · Conclusion Accordingly, the Commission is ordered to provide Mr. Stafford a response in a manner

Alycia DeAngelis, Esq. SPR19/2107 Page 3 October 29, 2019 consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within 10 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. Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Bill Stafford