← Back to Search
Jeff Raymond v. Braintree, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20230950)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 05-10-2023
ClosedAppealPetitioner Won
SPR 20230950 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Jeff Raymond concerning records held by Braintree, Town of - Police Department, opened 05-10-2023. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20230950
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Jeff Raymond
- Date Opened
- 05-10-2023
- Date Closed
- 05-23-2023
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 May 23, 2023 SPR23/0950 Lieutenant Kevin Ware Records Access Officer Braintree Police Department 1 John F. Kennedy Memorial Drive Braintree, MA 02184 Dear Lieutenant Ware: I have received the petition of Jeff Raymond, of the Bramanville Tribune, appealing the response of the Braintree Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On April 10, 2023, Mr. Raymond requested the following records: [1.] A copy of the document your police department sent to the POST Commission, likely sent between November 2021 and June of 2022, providing the information requested by the POST Commission for its ‘database listing complaints against police officers’ planned for May of 2022.... [2.] Copies of any relevant responsive communications between a) your police department and/or your town officials and b) the POST Commission in regard to the database planned for May of 2022 as detailed above and/or compliance with the reporting for said database between the dates of July 1, 2021 and December 31, 2022, broadly construed.... [3.] Copies of any relevant responsive communications within or between a) your police department and b) your municipal administration in regard to this database and/or compliance with this mandate between the dates of July 1, 2021 and December 31, 2022, broadly construed.... [4.] Information concerning ‘complaints against police officers’ issued in the calendar year 2022 and through March 31, 2023, preferably in the same format used for the information sent to POST between November 2021 and June of 2022 for the earlier-mentioned database.... 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 Lieutenant Kevin Ware SPR23/0950 Page 2 May 23, 2023 [5.] A copy of the document your police department sent to the POST Commission as sent to the POST Commission, likely sent between December 1, 2022 and April 9, 2023, to comply with the ‘2023 POST Commission Disciplinary Records Resubmission.’... [6.] Copies of any relevant responsive communications within or between a) your police department and b) your municipal administration in regard to this database and/or compliance with the ‘2023 POST Commission Disciplinary Records Resubmission’ described above.... The Department responded on April 21, 2023, providing a responsive record in redacted form. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, Mr. Raymond appealed, and this case 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 April 21st Response In its April 21, 2023 response, the Department provides a responsive document with four lines redacted, and states that “the first four were redacted as they are ongoing and still open in the investigation phase.” Burden of Specificity Under the Public Records Law, the burden shall be upon the records custodian to identify records being withheld and prove with specificity an exemption which applies. 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”); see also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Police Comm’r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); Flatley, -------------------------------- Lieutenant Kevin Ware SPR23/0950 Page 3 May 23, 2023 419 Mass. at 511. Consequently, I find the Department did not meet its burden of specificity in responding to the records request. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. Raymond with a response to his 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 the response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Jeff Raymond