Max Larkin v. Boston, City of - Law Department (SPR 20201060)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records July 2, 2020 SPR20/1060 Shawn Williams, Esq. City of Boston Public Records Division 1 City Hall Square, Room 615 Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney Williams: I have received your petition on behalf of the City of Boston (City) requesting an extension of time to produce records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). As required by law, the City furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). On June 15, 2020, Max Larkin requested: The text of any current memorandum of understanding (MOU), memorandum of agreement (MOA), agreement for mutual aid or other formal agreement between the Boston Police Department and the police departments of local universities, including but not limited to: • the Harvard University Police Department, • the Boston College Police Department, • the Boston University Police Department, • the Northeastern University Police Department, and • the UMass Boston Police Department. 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; 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

Shawn A. Williams, Esq. SPR20/1060 Page 2 July 2, 2020 (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. G. L. c. 66, § 10(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). Extension of time to produce responsive records In its June 29, 2020, petition, the City requests “the Supervisor permit the City additional time needed to comply with [this] request.” The City indicates that “[a] search must be conducted to determine whether responsive records exist.” However, it is unclear why this search requires additional time beyond the statutory allotment. Conclusion I find that in light of the lack of explanation in the City’s petition, the City has not established good cause to warrant an extension of additional time to respond to this request. Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Max Larkin