← Back to Search
Hector E. Pineiro v. Worcester, City of (SPR 20212399)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Public records appeal decision · Filed 09-17-2021
ClosedTime PetitionDecision
SPR 20212399 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Hector E. Pineiro concerning records held by Worcester, City of, opened 09-17-2021. Type: Time Petition. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Public records appeal decision.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20212399
- Case Type
- Time Petition
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Hector E. Pineiro
- Custodian
- Worcester, City of
- Date Opened
- 09-17-2021
- Date Closed
- 09-21-2021
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 September 21, 2021 SPR21/2399 Attorney Janice Thompson City of Worcester Law Department 455 Main Street Room 303 Worcester, MA 01608 Dear Attorney Janice Thompson: I have received your petition on behalf of the City of Worcester Law Department (Department) seeking an extension of time to produce records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). As required by law, it is my understanding that the Department furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor, Attorney Hector Pineiro. Id. In a letter dated August 16, 2021, Attorney Pineiro requested 30 categories of records primarily related to arrests made at a Black Lives Matter rally in Worcester. Petition 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; (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). 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 Attorney Janice Thompson SPR21/2399 Page 2 September 21, 2021 Current Petition In its September 17, 2021 petition, the Department “request[s] that the Supervisor grant the City of Worcester an extension of 30 business days to produce records responsive to Attorney Pineiro[’s] … request for public records.” The Department asserts: [the] categories encompassed by this request include various specified Bureau of Professional Standards reports, interview recordings or transcripts of interviews with individuals (both identified and unidentified), police incident reports, use of force narratives, various video records, personnel records, communications requiring technical services searches and manual review, Bureau of Professional Standards officer incident histories, and all Bureau of Professional Standards reports relating to certain allegations over a 9 year, 9 month date range. The Department explains “[t]he work to locate and identify responsive records alone is and will continue to be extensive.” The Department indicates their intention to “provide some records on a rolling basis.” The Department further notes that “it is beyond the capabilities and resources of the [Department] to assign an employee, or in this case multiple employees, to work full-time on a single public records request,” as it would “place an undue burden on the [Department] and divert resources away from other essential municipal functions.” The Department explains that: [s]ome of the requested records contain information exempt from disclosure and subject to redaction, including but not limited to names and personally identifying information of complainants and witnesses, names and personally identifying information of informants exempt from disclosure pursuant to M.G.L. c. 4 § 7 cl. 26 (f); home addresses of government employees/law enforcement exempt from disclosure pursuant to M.G.L. c. 4 § 7 cl. 26 (a) through M.G.L. c. 66 §10B; social security number and driver’s license information, exempt pursuant to M.G.L. c. 4 § 7 cl. 26 (a); victim and witness names and personally identifying information exempt pursuant to M.G.L. c. 4 § 7 cl. 26 (a) and (f); and information related to reports of domestic violence or sexual assault which the City is prohibited from disclosing pursuant to M.G.L. c. 4 § 7 cl. 26 (a) through M.G.L. c. 41 § 97D. The Department states that they have “declined to petition the Supervisor of Public Records to assess fees for the search, review and segregation of records responsible to the request” and have “waived the fees associated with statutory redactions.” Conclusion I find that in light of the above, the Department has established good cause to permit an extension of time. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(c)(i)-(iv). I grant the Department an extension of 30 business days to furnish copies of records responsive to Attorney Pineiro’s request. See G. L. c. Attorney Janice Thompson SPR21/2399 Page 3 September 21, 2021 66, § 10(c). The Department is to provide the records on a rolling basis, where possible. Please note, Attorney Pineiro has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the appropriate superior court. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(4),10A(c). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Attorney Hector Pineiro