MA Public Records Search
← Back to Search

Dennis M. Toomey, Esq. v. Holyoke, City of - Police Department (SPR 20192242)

Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Public records appeal decision · Filed 11-05-2019

ClosedTime PetitionDecision

SPR 20192242 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Dennis M. Toomey, Esq. concerning records held by Holyoke, City of - Police Department, opened 11-05-2019. Type: Time Petition. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Public records appeal decision.

Case Details

Case Number
20192242
Case Type
Time Petition
Case Subtype
Initial
Status
Closed
Requester
Dennis M. Toomey, Esq.
Custodian
Holyoke, City of - Police Department
Date Opened
11-05-2019
Date Closed
11-08-2019

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 8, 2019 SPR19/2242 . Officer Caron L. Porter Records Access Officer Holyoke Police Department 13 8 Appleton Street Holyoke, MA 01040"'.5706 Dear Officer Porter: I have received your petition on behalf of the Holyoke Police Department (Department) seeking an extension of time to furnish copies of a requested record, or any portion thereof. G. L. c. 66, § lO(c). As required by law, the Department furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor. Id. Specifically, on October 30, 2019, Attorney Dennis Toomey requested "[a]ll records, documents, papers, reports, photographs, notes, witness statements, electronic or computer documents, surveillance video, video evidence, and audio recordings ... relating to the investigation of the July 7, 1999 shooting death of Angel Ortiz ... " Petitions for an extension of time Under the Public Records Law, upon a showing of good cause, the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) may grant a single extension to an agency not to exceed 20 business days and a single extension to a municipality not to exceed 30 business days. In determining whether there has been a showing of good cause, the Supervisor shall consider, but shall not be limited to considering: (i) the need to search for, collect, segregate or examine records; (ii) the scope of redaction required to prevent unlawful disclosure; (iii) the capacity or the normal business hours of operation of the agency or municipality to produce the request without the extension; (iv) efforts undertaken by the agency or municipality in fulfilling the current request and previous requests; (v) whether the request, either individually or as part of a series of requests from the same requestor, is frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality; and (vi) the public interest served by expeditious disclosure. One Ashbmion Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832• Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre • pre@sec.state.ma.us

Officer Caron L. Porter SPR19/2242 Page 2 November 8, 2019 G. L. c. 66, § lO(c). If the Supervisor determines that the request is part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass, and the requests are not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, the Supervisor may grant a longer extension or relieve the agency or municipality of its obligation to provide copies of the records sought. Id. The filing of a petition does not affect the requirement that a Records Access Officer (RAO) shall provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 36.06(4)(b). Current petition In its November 5, 2019 petition, the Department indicates it "requires additional time beyond the 10 business day allotted under the law in order to respond to the request." The Department states they "will produce the records within 25 business days following the initial receipt of your request. .. " A member of the Public Records staff contacted the Department and it is my understanding that the City is unsure if it will need additional days beyond the time period allowed in G. L. c. 66, § 1O (b )(vi), which provides that a municipality may provide a timeframe not to exceed 25 business days to produce responsive records. Conclusion · Accordingly, given that the Department has indicated it would produce records within 25 business days of receipt of the request, I find it unnecessary to opine on the Department's petition for an extension of time to produce records at this time. If the Department needs additional days beyond the statutory allowance, it must submit a new petition within 20 days of receipt of the request. G. L. c. 66, § lO(c). Any records being provided must be produced in a manner consistent with the Public Records Law and its Access Regulations. Attorney Toomey may appeal the substantive nature of the Department's response within 90 days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1 ). Sincerely, ~r~ Supervisor of Records cc: Dennis M. Toomey, Esq.