Todd Feathers v. Boston, City of - Police Department (SPR 20231090)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records June 7, 2023 SPR23/1090 Shawn A. Williams, Esq. Director of Public Records Records Access Officer City of Boston 1 City Hall Plaza, Room 615 Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney Williams: I have received the petition of Todd Feathers appealing the response of the City of Boston (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On May 13, 2022, Mr. Feathers requested: [1] All emails exchanges-including incoming messages, outgoing messages, forwards, and attachments-between the department’s chief/commissioner and ShotSpotter representatives since January 1, 2021. ShotSpotter representatives can be identified by searching the department’s email system for addresses ending in “@shotspotter.com.” [2] All emails exchanges-including incoming messages, outgoing messages, forwards, and attachments-between the department’s public information and/or media relations staff members and ShotSpotter representatives since January 1, 2021. ShotSpotter representatives can be identified by searching the department’s email system for addresses ending in “@shotspotter.com.” The City provided a response on May 15, 2023. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Mr. Feathers petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR23/1090, 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 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

Shawn A. Williams, Esq. SPR23/1090 Page 2 June 7, 2023 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 City’s May 15th Response In its May 15, 2023 response, the City states, “[i]n accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(i) and the Chawla decision, it is unclear with ‘sufficient particularity’ which records you seek. Thus, your request ‘calls upon non-lawyer administrative personnel to interpret the scope of what is sought, and then make fine judgments about what documents are and are not sufficiently “[regarding]” the category of materials requested.’” Current Appeal In his current appeal, Mr. Feathers argues: In [its] rejection letter, [the City] misleadingly cites a superior court order and claims that I have not described the records I’m seeking with “sufficient particularity” and that my request would require non-lawyers to make “fine judgments” about wat documents do and don’t fall within the scope of the request…. To begin with, employees of the BPD do not need to make any judgments about what documents satisfy my requests. I clearly defined the time parameters, types of documents, and senders and recipients of the relevant emails and provided a simple way for the department to identify responsive records—by searching its email system for messages to/from @shotspotter.com addresses. Reasonable Description of Records Sought A request for records must reasonably describe the records sought. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(i). In Chawla, the Superior Court found that under the Public Records Law “[t]he reasonable description requirement contemplates that a requesting party will identify documents or categories of documents with sufficient particularity that government employees will be able

Shawn A. Williams, Esq. SPR23/1090 Page 3 June 7, 2023 to understand exactly what they are looking for, and then make a prompt production.” See Jaideep Chawla v. Dept of Revenue, Suffolk. Sup. No. 1784CV02087, at 2 (January 23, 2019). The court further indicated “[r]equests for documents that are articulated with very broad language that calls upon non-lawyer administrative personnel to interpret the scope of what is sought, and then make fine judgments about what documents are and are not sufficiently ‘related’ to the category of materials requested, will not satisfy this statutory standard.” In this case, Mr. Feathers has provided specific descriptions of the emails he is seeking, including a date range and the categories of senders and recipients. While his request may result in a large volume of responsive records, he has provided sufficient particularity required to identify the documents he is seeking. To the extent possible, the City must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. This office encourages Mr. Feathers and the City to continue communicating to facilitate providing records more efficiently and affordably. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vii) (a municipality shall suggest a reasonable modification of the scope of the request or offer to assist the requestor to modify the scope of the request if doing so would enable the municipality to produce the records sought more efficiently and affordably). Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Mr. Feathers 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: Todd Feathers