Eleonora Bianchi v. Bristol County Sheriff's Office (SPR 20230290)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records February 28, 2023 SPR23/0290 Lorraine J. Rousseau, Esq. Records Access Officer Bristol County Sheriff’s Office 400 Faunce Corner Road North Dartmouth, MA 02747 Dear Attorney Rousseau: I have received the petition of Eleonora Bianchi, of The New Bedford Light, appealing the response of the Bristol 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 October 26, 2022, Ms. Bianchi requested copies of records concerning an identified person as follows: [1] J07: Corrections – inmate records; [2] J07-07: Inmate [m]edical [r]ecords; and, [3] J07-18: Inmate [s]urveillance [r]ecords, including audio and video of [the identified person’s cell [for] the entire day of September 4, 2022. On October 26, 2022, the Office responded and asked for clarification. On October 30, 2023, Ms. Bianchi sent an email to the Office, clarifying, “[t]he date range from September 1, 2022 to September 5, 2022 is only for these documents: J07: Corrections – Inmate records; and J07-07: Inmate [m]edical [r]ecords.” Prior Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR22/2964 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (January 13, 2023). SPR22/2964 was closed after the Office provided a response on January 9, 2023. Unsatisfied with the Office’s response, Ms. Bianchi petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR23/0290, 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 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

Lorraine Rousseau, Esq. SPR23/0290 Page 2 February 28, 2023 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) (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 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 January 9th Response In its January 9, 2023 response, the Office denied the request for the medical records under Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law. The Office advised that with regard to the requested “... inmate records and video surveillance records, the Sheriff’s Office is presently working on assembling the requested records [and needed] additional time ... to respond.” Current Appeal In her petition, Ms. Bianchi asserts, “[t]he [Office] refused to provide the Medical Records of [the identified deceased person] for privacy reasons. But [the Office] never provided the other records of my request.” It is my understanding that Ms. Bianchi’s appeal is limited to records pertaining to “. . . inmate records and video surveillance records” that she is yet to receive. In light of the Office’s January 9th response, it is unclear whether the Office possesses the records, and if so, when it intends to provide the records. The Office “may identify a reasonable timeframe in which the [agency] 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 provided further, that the requestor may voluntarily agree to a response date beyond the timeframe set forth herein.” G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Where Ms. Bianchi clarified her request on October 30th, it is unclear why the Office has not provided the requested inmate records and the video surveillance record(s). I find that the Office has not met its burden in responding to the request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Consequently, I find the Office must provide an estimated date as to when it intends to complete the search and provide the outstanding records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the Office

Lorraine Rousseau, Esq. SPR23/0290 Page 3 February 28, 2023 must provide responsive records on a rolling basis in order to satisfy the request. Conclusion Accordingly, the Office is ordered to provide Ms. Bianchi with a response to her request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within ten 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: Eleonora Bianchi