Greg Rowehl v. Department of State Police (SPR 20233110)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records January 9, 2024 SPR23/3110 Allison Mondello Records Access Officer Massachusetts Department of State Police 470 Worcester Road Framingham, MA 01702 Dear Ms. Mondello: I have received the petition of Greg Rowehl appealing the response of the Department of State Police (Department) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On December 6, 2023, Mr. Rowehl requested, “[a]ll incident reports & body camera video for all State Police visits concerning [a specified address] from August 2022 through today. In particular, the response by troopers in August 2022 to a call of a threat of a fence removal, response to a fence removal in November 2022.” The Department provided a response on December 22, 2023. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Rowehl petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR23/3110, 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, § l0A(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. Attorney 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 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

Allison Mondello SPR23/3110 Page 2 January 9, 2024 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 December 22nd Response In its December 22, 2023 response, the Department stated, “[d]ue to the high volume of requests we receive daily, we have not yet had a chance to process your request.” Current appeal In his appeal, Mr. Rowehl states, “I don’t believe high-volume request is a valid reason for not fulfilling their obligation.” Based on the Department’s response and Mr. Rowehl’s appeal, it is unclear if the Department possesses any records responsive to the request. The duty to comply with requests for records extends to those records that exist and are in the possession, custody, or control of the custodian of records at the time of the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(ii). Custodians are expected to use their superior knowledge of the records in their custody to assist requestors in obtaining the desired information. See 950 C.M.R. 32.04(5). The Department must clarify this matter. G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. Rowehl with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within 10 business days. A copy of the 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. Mr. Rowehl may appeal the substantive nature of the Department’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Greg Rowehl