Robert T. Oliveira v. Bristol County Sheriff's Office (SPR 20192418)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records December 10, 2019 SPR19/2418 Lorraine J. Rousseau, Esq. Bristol County Sheriffs Office 400 Faunce Corner Road North Dartmouth, MA 02747 Dear Attorney Rousseau: I have received your petition on behalf of the Bristol County Sheriffs Office (Office) seeking relief from its obligation to produce responsive records. G. L. c. 66, § 10( c ); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). As required by law, the School furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor. G. L. c. 66, § lO(d)(iv). In an email dated November 4, 2019, Robert Oliveira submitted a "broad" request for several categories of records within the Office. Petitions for an extension of time Under the Public Records Law, a records access officer may petition the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) for an extension of the time for the agency or municipality to furnish copies of the requested record, or any portion of the requested record, that the agency or municipality has within its possession, custody or control and intends to furnish within 20 business days after initial receipt of the request, or within 10 business days after receipt of a determination by the Supervisor that the requested record constitutes a public record. Upon a showing of good cause, the 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 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

Lorraine J. Rousseau, Esq. SPR19/2418 Page 2 December 10, 2019 the same requestor, is frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality; and (vi) the public interest served by expeditious disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § lO(c). If the Supervisor determines that the request is part of a series 9f 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 petition, the Office requests a determination that Mr. Oliveria's request is "frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass and that such request is not intended for broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity." In its petition the Office claims that "Mr. Oliveira states he will be submitting to Sheriff Hodgson [] one of many requests he has submitted to persons chosen in each state to 'take it out on' when President Trump 'upsets' him or refuses to comply with subpoenas. By Mr. Oliveira's own admission, he has been choosing persons in each state to 'take it out on.' Mr. Oliveira has embarked on a mission to punish persons he believes support President Trump and his policies ... " The Superior Court ruled on a matter involving public records requests that were intended to intimidate or harass. Specifically, in Erickson v. Exec. Office of Envtl. Affairs, 2006 WL 3010949 (Aug. 8, 2006) the plaintiff requested dozens of public records from the defendant which the court found to be overly broad and, in some cases, unlimited in time. The plaintiff was also found to be abusive to the Court and its staff as well as harassing to the opposing party. Id. Based on the information provided in the petition, I find that the Office has not met the burden to demonstrate that the requests for the first page of each grant, communications regarding substance abuse, and financial contributions are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass in a manner similar to the requests described in Erickson. Further, the Office has not established how these types ofrecords do not relate to an actual or alleged government activity. Please note that in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10( c) , petitions for relief of a custodian's obligation to respond to public record requests must be made within 20 business

Lorraine J. Rousseau, Esq. SPR19/2418 Page 3 December 10, 2019 days after initial receipt of the request, or within 10 business days after receipt of a determination by the supervisor of public records that the requested record constitutes a public record. Conclusion Accordingly, I decline to grant the Office's petition under G. L. c. 66, § lO(c) for relief of its obligation to provide public records responsive to Mr. Oliveira's request. However, Mr. Oliveira and the Office are encouraged to communicate further to allow Mr. Oliveira to narrow his request so that records could be provided more efficiently and affordably. Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Robert Oliveira