Laura H. Ortiz v. Dracut, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20212791)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records November 4, 2021 SPR21/2791 Peter Bartlett Chief of Police Dracut Police Department 110 Loon Hill Road Dracut, MA 02110 Dear Chief Bartlett: I have received the petition of Laura Ortiz appealing the response of the Dracut Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On October 7, 2021, Ms. Ortiz requested fourteen categories of records that may be in the possession of the Town of Dracut and the Department. Having not been provided a response, Ms. Ortiz petitioned this office on October 25th and this appeal, SPR21/2791, was opened as a result. Previous Appeal Ms. Ortiz has previously requested records in conjunction with Mr. Justin George that have been the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR21/2166 Determination of the Supervisor (September 8, 2021). There, I declined to opine on the matter because Town Counsel informed this office that the requested records at issue in that determination were the subject of active litigation. Current Appeal On October 7, 2021, Ms. Ortiz had requested that the Town provide various documents that had, “…not been produced in prior [requests].” On October 22, 2021, in an e-mail to Ms. Ortiz, Town Counsel stated that, “Ms. Ortiz has already stated that she [is] ‘acting on behalf’ of [Mr. George]. One cannot just take [Mr. George’s name] off of a new [petition to the Public Records Division] and negate the [previous ruling in SPR21/2166].” Further, on October 22nd, in a written response to Ms. Ortiz, Town Counsel also asserted that the requested records are subject to litigation. 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

Peter Bartlett SPR21/2791 Page 2 November 4, 2021 The same day, Ms. Ortiz stated that, “[The] litigation exemption [i]s only being used…by the Town of Dracut…to manipulate the public records system to shield records that potentially identify any failures by the employees of Dracut and the Town itself…I therefore request that the [Supervisor of Records] compel [the Department] to produce these records in full.” Active Litigation 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b) provides in pertinent part: the Supervisor may deny an appeal for, among other reasons if, in the opinion of the Supervisor: 1. the public records in question are the subjects of disputes in active litigation, administrative hearings or mediation. This office has reviewed the federal trial court’s docket and verified that the civil litigation filed by Mr. George is still active and ongoing in the United States District Court, District of Massachusetts. See Justin George v. Town of Dracut, et al. (United States District Court, Dist. MA, Docket No. 1:19-cv-12291). Conclusion In light of the active and ongoing litigation, I decline to opine any further on these requests and this matter. See 950 CMR 32.08(2)(b). Accordingly, this administrative appeal is closed. If Ms. Ortiz is not satisfied with the resolution of this administrative appeal, she is advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(A)(c). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Laura H. Ortiz James P. Hall, Esq.