Allison Jarmanning v. Boston, City of - Public Records (SPR 20211672)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records July 21, 2021 SPR21/1672 Shawn A. Williams, Esq. Director of Public Records City of Boston 1 City Hall Square, Room 615 Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney Williams: I have received the petition of Allison Jarmanning appealing the response of the Boston Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On June 17, 2021, Ms. Jarmanning requested “[i]nternal affairs records, personnel orders or settlement agreements” regarding an identified individual. The Department provided a response on June 29, 2021. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, Ms. Jarmanning petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR21/1672, 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. 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 Williams, Esq. SPR21/1672 Page 2 July 21, 2021 The Department’s June 29th response In its June 29, 2021 response, the Department cited Exemption (a) and Exemption (c) for the redaction and withholding of records. Regarding Exemption (a), the Department stated “[a]ll records associated with IAD2018-0471, IAD2016-0253 are being withheld under the so-called statutory exemption to the public records law. The records, which include cover sheets, Sergeant and Lieutenant's reports are being withheld in their entirety because said records involve officers responding to an alleged incident of domestic violence and as such, the Department is prohibited from releasing them by statute. The statute prohibits public disclosure of all records containing allegations of sexual assault or domestic violence. G. L. c. 41, § 97D; G. L. c. 41, § 98F; G. L. c. 209A, § 8; G. L. c. 4 §7(26)(a).” Ms. Jarmanning appealed the Department’s response citing Exemption (a) contending “department did not make clear how the internal affairs reports are the types of reports affected by the statute and exempt from disclosure.” Exemption (a) Exemption (a), known as the statutory exemption, permits the withholding of records that are: specifically or by necessary implication exempted from disclosure by statute G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(a). A governmental entity may use the statutory exemption as a basis for withholding requested materials where the language of the exempting statute relied upon expressly or necessarily implies that the public’s right to inspect records under the Public Records Law is restricted. See Att’y Gen. v. Collector of Lynn, 377 Mass. 151, 54 (1979); Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. v. Appeals Court, 372 Mass. 539, 545-46 (1977). This exemption creates two categories of exempt records. The first category includes records that are specifically exempt from disclosure by statute. Such statutes expressly state that such a record either “shall not be a public record,” “shall be kept confidential” or “shall not be subject to the disclosure provision of the Public Records Law.” The second category under the exemption includes records deemed exempt under statute by necessary implication. Such statutes expressly limit the dissemination of particular records to a defined group of individuals or entities. A statute is not a basis for exemption if it merely lists individuals or entities to whom the records are to be provided; the statute must expressly limit access to the listed individuals or entities. The statute states in relevant part: All reports of rape and sexual assault or attempts to commit such offenses, all reports of abuse perpetrated by family or household members, as defined in

Shawn Williams, Esq. SPR21/1672 Page 3 July 21, 2021 section 1 of chapter 209A, and all communications between police officers and victims of such offenses or abuse shall not be public reports and shall be maintained by the police departments in a manner that shall assure their confidentiality . . . G. L. c. 41, § 97D. Based on the Department’s response, it is unclear what type(s) of records are being withheld from disclosure. To deny access to a record under the Public Records Law, a records access officer must identify the record, categories of records, or portions of the record it intends to withhold. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3)(c)(4). Further, it is uncertain how the withheld records fall within the type of records contemplated in G. L. c. 41 § 97D. A records custodian is required to not only cite an exemption but to specifically explain the applicability of the exemption to the requested records for compliance with the Public Records Law. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv). The Department must clarify this matter. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Ms. Jarmanning 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: Allison Jarmanning Sgt. Det. John Boyle