Jeff Raymond v. Taunton, City of - Police Department (SPR 20231650)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records August 1, 2023 SPR23/1650 Glen Jackson Lieutenant Taunton Police Department 23 Summer Street Taunton, MA 02780 Dear Lieutenant Jackson: I have received the petition of Jeff Raymond, of the Bramanville Tribune, appealing the response of the Taunton 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 16, 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 Glen Jackson SPR23/1650 Page 2 August 1, 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. Prior Appeal The requested records were the subject of a prior appeal. See SPR23/1404 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (July 7, 2023). In my July 7th determination, I found it unclear how all the responsive records related to the ongoing litigation and I ordered the Department to clarify this. On July 18, 2023, the Department provided a further response. In this response the Department provided responsive records for Items 2, 3, and 5, but withheld records responsive to Items 1 and 4. The Department further indicated that it had no responsive records for Item 6. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response regarding Items 1 and 4, Mr. Raymond petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR23/1651, was opened as a result. The Department’s July 18th response In its July 18, 2023 response regarding Items 1 and 4, the Department stated: Although 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 by an organization representing members of this department. 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. Also, in withholding these responsive records, this Department is relying upon the following decisions rendered by the Supervisor of Public Records in substantially similar matters: SPR20221301 (June 17, 2022); SPR20221373 (June 29, 2022) Pending Litigation 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b) provides in pertinent part:

Lieutenant Glen Jackson SPR23/1650 Page 3 August 1, 2023 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 Based upon a July 17, 2023 letter from the Massachusetts Peace Officer Standards and Training Commission (POST), new information has come to light in which I find that records responsive to Items 1, 2 and 5 are not related to the pending litigation. Burden of specificity; identify the responsive records The Department denied Mr. Raymond’s request for records under Items 1 and 4 without claiming any exemption(s) in the Public Records Law that would support the withholding of the responsive records. Under the Public Records Law, the burden shall be upon the custodian to prove with specificity the exemption which applies. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); see also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Police Comm’r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); Flatley, 419 Mass. at 511. In addition, the Department did not identify the records, categories of records or portions of records in its possession that it intends to withhold from disclosure. To deny access to a record under the Public Records Law, a records access officer must identify the record, categories of records, or portions of the record it intends to withhold. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3)(c)(4). It is unclear what records the Department has in its possession that are responsive to Items 1 and 4. Therefore, the Department must identify what type of record(s) it has in its possession that the Department withheld. 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