MA Public Records Search
← Back to Search

Jeff Raymond v. Dunstable, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20231012)

Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 05-15-2023

ClosedAppealPetitioner Won

SPR 20231012 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Jeff Raymond concerning records held by Dunstable, Town of - Police Department, opened 05-15-2023. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.

Case Details

Case Number
20231012
Case Type
Appeal
Case Subtype
Initial
Status
Closed
Requester
Jeff Raymond
Custodian
Dunstable, Town of - Police Department
Date Opened
05-15-2023
Date Closed
05-30-2023
Date Request Submitted
04-10-2023
Response Provided Date
04-19-2023

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 30, 2023 SPR23/1012 Eric Hoar Chief of Police Dunstable Police Department 23 Pleasant St Dunstable, MA 01827 Dear Chief Hoar: I have received the petition of Jeff Raymond, of the Bramanville Tribune, appealing the response of the Dunstable Police Department (Department) to his 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 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. [5.] A copy of the document your police department sent to the POST Commission as 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

Chief Eric Hoar SPR23/1012 Page 2 May 30, 2023 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 19, 2023. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Raymond petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR23/1012 was opened as a result. The Department’s April 19th response In its April 19, 2023 response, the Department stated: The responsive records in question are the subjects of dispute in active litigation, administrative hearings, or mediation… it is the opinion of the Department that these records relate directly to the matters of Hovsepian, Scott et al. v. Massachusetts Peace Officer Standards and Training Commission, Suffolk Superior Court Docket no. 2284 CV 00906 and New England Police Benevolent Association, Inc., and Daniel Gilbert v. Massachusetts Peace Officers Standards and Training Commission, Suffolk Superior Court Docket no. 2384 CV 00500. Upon review of the information provided on the Massachusetts Trial Court Electronic Case Access, both of these matters appear to still be open and pending. Pending Litigation 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b) provides in pertinent part: The Supervisor may deny an appeal for, among other reasons if, in the opinion of the Supervisor: The public records in question are the subjects of disputes in active litigation, administrative hearings or mediation 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, 419 Mass. at 511. Consequently, I find the Department did not meet its burden of specificity to in responding to the records request.

Chief Eric Hoar SPR23/1012 Page 3 May 30, 2023 Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. Raymond 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: Jeff Raymond