MA Public Records Search
← Back to Search

Jeff Raymond v. Duxbury, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20231002)

Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Administratively closed · Filed 05-15-2023

ClosedAppealResolved

SPR 20231002 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Jeff Raymond concerning records held by Duxbury, Town of - Police Department, opened 05-15-2023. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Administratively closed.

Case Details

Case Number
20231002
Case Type
Appeal
Case Subtype
Initial
Status
Closed
Requester
Jeff Raymond
Custodian
Duxbury, Town of - Police Department
Date Opened
05-15-2023
Date Closed
05-19-2023
Date Request Submitted
04-10-2023

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 19, 2023 SPR23/1002 Lieutenant Lewis W. Chubb Records Access Officer Duxbury Police Department 155 Mayflower Street Duxbury, MA 02332 Dear Lieutenant Chubb: I have received the petition of Jeff Raymond appealing the response of the Duxbury 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 April 10, 2023, Mr. Raymond requested “any responsive documents and/or communications concerning your municipality’s police department and its compliance with the Massachusetts Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Commission’s duties under Chapter 253 of the Acts of 2020 to create a ‘database listing complaints against police officers,’ as detailed below.” Specifically, Mr. Raymond requested: [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 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 Lewis W. Chubb SPR23/1002 Page 2 May 19, 2023 used for the information sent to POST between November 2021 and June of 2022 for the earlier-mentioned database…. [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 22, 2023. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Raymond petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR23/1002, was opened as a result. While this appeal was pending, the Department provided an additional response dated May 19, 2023 to Mr. Raymond. 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. 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 Department’s April 22nd Response In its April 22, 2023 response, the Department referenced civil litigation pending in Suffolk Superior Court. See Hovsepian, Scott et al. v. Massachusetts Peace Officer Standards and Training Commission (Superior Court Docket No. 2284CV00906) and New England Police Benevolent Association, Inc. and Daniel Gilbert v. Massachusetts Peace Officer Standards and Training Commission (Superior Court Docket No. 2384CV00500). The Department stated,

Lieutenant Lewis W. Chubb SPR23/1002 Page 3 May 19, 2023 “[a]lthough the Department is presently in possession of the requested records, the Department intends to withhold the records in their entirety pursuant to 950 CMR 32.08(2) as the responsive records in question are the subjects of dispute in active litigation, administrative hearings, or mediation.” The Department provided an additional response dated May 19, 2023 to Mr. Raymond. In correspondence to this office dated May 19, 2023, Mr. Raymond states, “After submission of this appeal, [the Department] provided all available responsive documents. I can consider this request complete on my end, and I believe the state can close this out.” In light of the Department’s May 19, 2023 response to Mr. Raymond and Mr. Raymond’s May 19, 2023 correspondence to this office, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Jeff Raymond