MA Public Records Search
← Back to Search

Harris Krinsky v. Beverly, City of - (SPR 20202370)

Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 12-01-2020

ClosedAppealPetitioner Won

SPR 20202370 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Harris Krinsky concerning records held by Beverly, City of -, opened 12-01-2020. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.

Case Details

Case Number
20202370
Case Type
Appeal
Case Subtype
Initial
Status
Closed
Requester
Harris Krinsky
Custodian
Beverly, City of -
Date Opened
12-01-2020
Date Closed
12-15-2020
Date Request Submitted
11-10-2020
Processing Fees Charged
0.00
Petitions Regarding Fees
No
Time to Comply
1 Business Day
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 December 15, 2020 SPR20/2370 Attorney Kevin Q. Corridan, Esq. City of Beverley 191 Cabot Street Beverly, MA 01915 Dear Attorney Corridan: I have received the petition of Attorney Harris Krinsky appealing the nonresponse of the City of Beverley (City) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, on November 10, 2020, Attorney Krinsky requested six categories of records concerning the Beverly Police Department. 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, § l0A(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, § l0(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. Subsequent to the intervention by a member of the Public Records Division, I learned that the City is aware of this appeal and is working on a response. As of the date of this letter, it is my understanding that the City has not provided Attorney Krinsky a response to his request for records. 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

Kevin Q. Corridan, Esq. SPR20/2370 Page 2 December 15, 2020 Order Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Attorney Krinsky with a response to the request, 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, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Harris Krinsky, Esq.