← Back to Search
Stephanie Solis v. Massachusetts State Police (SPR 20192158)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Public records appeal decision · Filed 10-22-2019
ClosedAppealDecision
SPR 20192158 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Stephanie Solis concerning records held by Massachusetts State Police, opened 10-22-2019. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Public records appeal decision.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20192158
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Stephanie Solis
- Custodian
- Massachusetts State Police
- Date Opened
- 10-22-2019
- Date Closed
- 11-04-2019
- Date Request Submitted
- 09-19-2019
- Response Provided Date
- 10-17-2019
- Processing Fees Charged
- 0.00
- Petitions Regarding Fees
- No
- Went to Court
- No
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S, Murray Supervisor of Records November 4, 2019 SPR19/2158 Sean W. Farrell, Esq. Deputy Chief Legal Counsel Department of State Police 470 Worcester Road Framingham, MA 01702 Dear Attorney Farrell: I have received the petition of Stephanie Solis of MassLive appealing the response of the Department of State Police (Department) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see _ also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Ms. Solis requested “all time sheets for Trooper Matthew Sheehan between January 1, 2018 and March 1, 2018.” The Department responded on October 17, 2019 by providing certain responsive records. Ms. Solis petitioned this office and this appeal 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.MLR. 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, § 10(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 17" response the Department indicates “[a]ttached please find records responsive to your request for the designated time period. Please note that the Department has 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 Sean W. Farrell, Esq. SPR19/2158 Page 2 November 4, 2019 redacted the subject employee’s human resource number pursuant to the personnel exemption. G.L. c. 4, sec. 7, cl. 26 (c).” In her appeal petition Ms. Solis asserts “[o]n October 17, I received a response to my public records request that contained a compilation of ‘attendance and overtime’ listings, rather than the timesheets themselves.” She further indicates “[u]nder the state public records laws, department time sheets, time cards and related records are supposed to be public records. I seek clarification on whether the time sheets and time cards were withheld from me in this public records response and, if so, I seek these records in a timely fashion.” Existence of additional responsive records The duty to comply with requests for records extends to those records that exist and are in the possession, custody, or control of the custodian of records at the time of the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(ii). In light of the issues raised in Ms. Solis’s appeal, I find it is unclear whether additional responsive records exist. Specifically, the Department must explain whether it possesses any responsive time sheets other than the “compilation of ‘attendance and overtime’ listings” provided by the Department on October 17". See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(i), (b)(ii). If such time sheets exist, the Department must provide them in a manner consistent with the Public Records Law and its Regulations. The Department must also clarify whether it is withholding any responsive time sheets. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv). Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Ms. Solis with a response provided in a manner 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, Loboven Wma Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records ce: Stephanie Solis