Denise Coffey v. Barnstable County Sheriff's Office (SPR 20222265)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records October 18, 2022 SPR22/2265 Sheriff James Cummings Barnstable County Sheriff’s Office 6000 Sheriff’s Place Bourne, MA 02532 Dear Sheriff Cummings: I have received the petition of Denise Coffey, of the Cape Cod Times, appealing the response of the Barnstable County Sheriff’s Office (Office) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On September 6, 2022, Ms. Coffey requested all records pertaining to an event on August 22, 2022 in which the Office’s patrol boat rescued an individual who fell overboard near Chappaquiddick Island. On September 20, 2022, the Office provided Ms. Coffey with responsive records. On September 30, 2022, Ms. Coffey contacted the Office regarding the redaction of the boat name and the name of the individual who fell overboard from the boat. Subsequently, the Office provided a further response on October 3, 2022. Unsatisfied with the Office’s October 3rd response, Ms. Coffey petitioned the Supervisor of Records, and this appeal was opened. 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 an agency or municipality 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) (written response must “identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based…”); 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 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

Sheriff James Cummings SPR22/2265 Page 2 October 18, 2022 burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). 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 Office’s October 3, 2022 Response In the October 3rd response, the Office asserts, “…we are just respecting the individuals request for privacy.” The Office has asserted, “privacy” to withhold the name of the boat involved in the incident and the name of the individual who fell overboard from the particular boat and was rescued by the Office. However, the Office’s response did not cite an exemption in the Public Records Law with specificity to support the redactions. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv) (“the burden shall be upon the custodian to prove with specificity the exemption which applies”); see also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Police Comm’r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); Flatley, 419 Mass. at 511. Specifically, the Office has not met its burden to show how the redacted name of the subject of the record and the name of the boat that is also the subject of the record(s) fall within an exemption. As a result, I find the Office did not satisfy its burden in responding to this records request. The Office is advised that a records custodian is required to not only cite an exemption, but to specifically explain the applicability of the exemption to the requested records in order to comply with the Public Records Law and its Regulations. The Office must provide a response to specifically claim its exemption to withhold the redacted information. Conclusion Accordingly, the Office is ordered to provide Ms. Coffey with a response to her request 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 the response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Denise Coffey, Cape Cod Times