Joshua Dankoff v. Springfield, City of - Police Department (SPR 20202569)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records January 8, 2021 SPR20/2569 Andrea Stone Public Records Coordinator City of Springfield Police Department 130 Pearl Street Springfield, MA 01105 Dear Ms. Stone: I have received the petition of Joshua Dankoff of Citizens for Juvenile Justice (CFJJ), appealing the response of the Springfield Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, on October 8, 2020, Mr. Dankoff requested 7 categories of responsive records. This appeal pertains to the following: Policy request [1] Copies of all current municipal and departmental policies related to Data sharing and cooperation agreements or memorandums of understanding between the police department and: a. Federal immigration authorities. b. Regional intelligence centers, including the Boston Regional Intelligence Center (“BRIC”) or the Massachusetts Commonwealth Fusion Center. c. School districts or individual schools in your jurisdiction, including policies that guide practice of School Resource Officers. [2] Policies concerning gathering and storing of gang information, including: a. Policies for identifying and labeling gang members or individuals suspected of gang affiliation, b. Policies for maintaining and verifying information contained in any “gang database.” c. Policies for individuals to appeal listing on such a database d. Policies related to the sharing of database information with other local or federal authorities. [3] Policies concerning stop and frisk and/or field interrogation. 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

Andrea Stone SPR20/2569 Page 2 January 8, 2021 Data request [4] Data regarding the following: For the time period September 1, 2015 to the date of this request, for any person under the age of 21, all police documents sent to, transmitted to, or otherwise made available or accessible to: a. BRIC and/or the Massachusetts Commonwealth Fusion Center. b. Federal immigration authorities (including ICE, USCIS and/or any of their employees or agents.) [5] Stop and frisk and/or field interrogation data for all stop and frisk/field interrogation incidents from 2015 through when the search is conducted in 2020 is requested. To the extent possible, we request raw data with personal identifying information redacted to protect privacy. However, we request that any redactions of personally identifiable information do not extend any further than necessary. In particular, we request incident-level data in CSV or excel format (or if necessary another electronic format) that includes: - Sex of individual(s) encountered - Age of individual(s) encountered - Race of individual(s) encountered - Ethnicity of individual(s) encountered - Location of incident - Time and date of incident - Source of the field incident report (ie did this report come in via a 911 call, or other means) - Whether the field incident included a search of individuals. - Outcome of field interrogation be included in the release, including whether it led to an arrest or not. - Name of officer filing the field incident report (or other similarly named report) - Badge number of officer filing the field incident report (or other similarly named report) - Name of other officers listed in the report, if any - Badge numbers of other officers listed in the report, if any [6] Data regarding how many people have been identified by your department as gang affiliated, or gang involved. To the extent possible, we request raw data with personal identifying information and addresses redacted to protect privacy. . . . Specifically, we request an extract of your department’s gang member database (or associated list) to include the following columns: - Sex of individual(s) on the list - Age of individual(s) on the list - Race of individual(s) on the list - Ethnicity of individual(s) on the list - Whether the individual on the list is a resident of your municipality or not - Name of officer who entered the information determined that the individual fulfilled the gang assessment criteria - Badge number of the officer who determined that the individual fulfilled the

Andrea Stone SPR20/2569 Page 3 January 8, 2021 gang assessment criteria - Date individual entered the gang database, - Most recent date gang related information for the individual was reviewed or entered. The Department provided a response on October 26, 2020, providing certain records and requesting additional time to produce records responsive to other portions of the request. Having not heard from the Department, Mr. Dankoff petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR20/2569, 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.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, § 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. If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. The Department’s October 26th response In its October 26, 2020 response, the Department provided records responsive to items 1(c) and 7. With respect to items 1(a)-(b), 2 through 6, the Department requested “. . . an extension until November 16, 2020 to search for any documents that may be responsive to [these items].” G. L. c. 66, § 10(b) provides, in pertinent part, that if the magnitude or difficulty of the request unduly burdens the other responsibilities of the agency or municipality such that the agency or municipality cannot provide records within 10 business days, the agency or municipality must inform the requestor in writing within 10 business days. With respect to the timeframe to produce responsive records, the written response shall: identify a reasonable timeframe in which the agency or municipality shall produce the public records sought; provided, that for an agency, the timeframe shall not

Andrea Stone SPR20/2569 Page 4 January 8, 2021 exceed 15 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records and for a municipality the timeframe shall not exceed 25 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records; and provided further, that the requestor may voluntarily agree to a response date beyond the timeframes set forth herein. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Whereas Mr. Dankoff’s request was submitted on October 8, 2020, and the Department has not provided responsive records pertaining to those referenced above, I find Department has not met its burden in responding to the request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Consequently, I find the Department must provide an estimated date as to when it intends to complete the search and provide the outstanding records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the Department must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. Dankoff with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten (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: Joshua Dankoff