← Back to Search
Andrew Quemere v. Revere, City of - Police Department (SPR 20222403)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 10-24-2022
ClosedAppealPetitioner Won
SPR 20222403 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Andrew Quemere concerning records held by Revere, City of - Police Department, opened 10-24-2022. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20222403
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Andrew Quemere
- Custodian
- Revere, City of - Police Department
- Date Opened
- 10-24-2022
- Date Closed
- 11-03-2022
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records November 3, 2022 SPR22/2403 Captain Michelle Mangino Commander Bureau of Administration Revere Police Department 400 Revere Beach Parkway Revere, MA 02151 Dear Captain Mangino: I have received the petition of Andrew Quemere appealing the response of the Revere Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On August 8, 2022, Mr. Quemere requested: [1] The Department’s current use-of-force policies. For the purposes of this request, use-of-force includes unarmed force (hands, feet, etc.), firearms and other types of deadly force, tasers and other electroshock devices, other less-lethal weapons (pepper spray, batons, flashbangs, rubber bullet, etc.), and crowd-control weapons (tear gas, etc.), and any other type of force; [2] A blank copy of each form used to report use-of-force incidents. If a form is part of a computer program and is not easily exportable, it is acceptable to provide screenshots; [3] All monthly and annual use-of-force reports; [4] All data on use-of-force incidents that are stored by the [D]epartment’s use-of- force tracking software. Please provide the data in Excel or CSV format; if it is not feasible to provide the data in either format, please advise what formats are available; and [5] All numerical/statistical reports that can be generated by the Department’s use-of-force tracking software (e.g., reports showing the total number of incidents per year, the total number of incidents involving each officer, etc.). Prior appeal The requested records were the subject of a prior appeal. See SPR22/2028 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (September 9, 2022). SPR22/2028 was closed after the Department provided Mr. Quemere with a response on September 8, 2022. Unsatisfied with the Department’s 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 Captain Michelle Mangino SPR22/2403 Page 2 November 3, 2022 response, Mr. Quemere petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR22/2403, 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 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); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Att’y 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. The Department’s September 8th response The Department’s September 8, 2022 response is as follows: Response – Request No. 1: The Department provided a link to the Department’s website for the Department’s use-of-force policies; Response – Request No. 2: The Department provided a blank copy of each form used to report use-of-force incidents; Response – Request No. 3: We are currently working on this request; Response – Request No. 4: The Department does not have use-of-force tracking software at this time; and, Response – Request No. 5: The Department does not have use-of-force tracking software at this time. Current appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Quemere asserts, “…the [D]epartment provided a link to a policy and a copy of a blank form. The [D]epartment stated that it possessed additional responsive monthly and annual reports but was currently working on this request.” Timeliness of providing records G. L. c. 66, § 10(b) provides, in pertinent part, that if the magnitude or difficulty of the request unduly burdens the other responsibilities of the agency or municipality such that the agency or municipality cannot provide records within 10 business days, the agency or Captain Michelle Mangino SPR22/2403 Page 3 November 3, 2022 municipality must inform the requestor in writing within 10 business days. With respect to the timeframe to produce responsive records, the written response shall: identify a reasonable timeframe in which the agency or municipality shall produce the public records sought; provided, that for an agency, the timeframe shall not exceed 15 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records and for a municipality the timeframe shall not exceed 25 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records; and provided further, that the requestor may voluntarily agree to a response date beyond the timeframes set forth herein. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Whereas Mr. Quemere’s request was submitted on August 8th and the Department responded on September 8th, and has not provided the responsive monthly and annual use-of- force reports, I find Department has not met its burden in responding to the request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Consequently, I find the Department must provide an estimated date as to when it intends to provide the outstanding records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the Department must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. Quemere 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. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Andrew Quemere