Julie A. Halaby v. Boston, City of - Public Records (SPR 20220029)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records January 20, 2022 SPR22/0029 Shawn A. Williams, Esq. Director of Public Records City of Boston 1 City Hall Plaza, Room 615 Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney Williams: I have received the petition of Julie A. Halaby, Esq. of Halaby Law Group 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 October 22, 2020, Attorney Halaby requested “…the complete Internal Affairs Division (IAD) file for Case #IAD2020-0306, including but not limited to any and all investigation reports and bases for determining that the complaint should be classified as ‘unfounded’ as stated in the September 18, 2020 memorandum…” Prior Determinations This appeal was the subject of prior determinations. See SPR21/0064 Determination of Supervisor of Records (January 26, 2021); SPR21/1162 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (May 21, 2021). In my May 21st determination, I found the City did not meet its burden of demonstrating how the responsive records, in their entirety, are exempt from disclosure under Exemption (c) of the Public Records Law. The City was ordered to provide a response to Attorney Halaby in a manner consistent with the order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations. The City provided said response on November 16, 2021. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Attorney Halaby petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR22/0029, 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). 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. SPR22/0029 Page 2 January 20, 2022 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. 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. The City informed this office that the requested records are at issue in active litigation. This office has reviewed the trial court’s docket and verified that the related civil litigation is still active and ongoing. See Alvin Holder vs. Boston Police Department, City of Boston et al., (Docket No. 2084CV003800). Conclusion In light of the active and ongoing litigation, I decline to opine on this matter at this time. See 950 CMR 32.08(2)(b). Accordingly, this administrative appeal is closed. Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Julie A. Halaby, Esq.