Joseph L. Edwards v. Boston, City of - Police Department (SPR 20211982)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records August 19, 2021 SPR21/1982 Shawn A. Williams, Esq. Director of Public Records Records Access Officer City of Boston 1 City Hall Square, Room 615 Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney Williams: I have received the petition of Joseph L. Edwards Jr., Esq. of Prince Lobel Tye LLP appealing the response of the City of Boston (City) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On April 8, 2021, Attorney Edwards requested records relating to “Sight-Seeing Automobiles,” specifically “… copies of all such annual reports filed with the Office of Inspector of Carriages for the years 2014 to the present… copies of any other records the City of Boston may have showing the ridership for sightseeing tours, the capacity of existing tour companies, or any estimates or projections for tour demand from 2014 to the present.” On April 8, 2021, the City responded and provided an additional response on June 7, 2021. 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. 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. SPR21/1982 Page 2 August 19, 2021 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 City’s April 28th response and June 7th response In its April 28th response the City stated, “… [t]hese records have been released to the Public Records Center. Click the link below to login to the Records Center and retrieve the requested records.” On June 7th the City provided an additional response stating, “…I did reach out to the Boston Police Department Hackney Unit to determine whether any other responsive record exists.” Current Appeal In his current appeal Attorney Edwards suggested that there are additional records responsive to his request. Based on the City’s response, it is unclear if it possesses additional records responsive to the above request. The duty to comply with requests for records extends to those records that exist and are in the possession, custody, or control of the custodian of records at the time of the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(ii). Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Attorney Edwards 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. Attorney Edwards may appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Joseph L. Edwards Jr., Esq.