Todd Wallack v. Massachusetts Department of State Police (SPR 20240475)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records February 29, 2024 SPR24/0475 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 Todd Wallack, of WBUR, 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 January 11, 2024, Mr. Wallack requested the following: Spreadsheets the Massachusetts State Police sent to the POST Commission with disciplinary data on both current offices and former/transferred officers. Those records are described on the POST Commission website... [He is] seeking copies of both the original set of spreadsheets the State Police originally submitted in 2021 and early 2021, as well as the updated spreadsheets due in 2023. The Department responded on February 6, 2024, providing responsive records in redacted form, and citing Exemption (c) of the Public Records Law for redacting the records. See G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c). Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, Mr. Wallack appealed, and this case 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 municipality of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). 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 SPR24/0475 Page 2 February 29, 2024 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 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 February 6th Response In its February 6, 2024 response, the Department cites Exemption (c) for redacting dates of birth from the responsive spreadsheets. See G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c). Exemption (c) Exemption (c) applies to: personnel and medical files or information and any other materials or data relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy; provided, however, that this subclause shall not apply to records related to a law enforcement misconduct investigation G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c). Analysis under Exemption (c) is subjective in nature and requires a balancing of the public’s right to know against the relevant privacy interests at stake. Torres v. Att’y Gen., 391 Mass. 1, 9 (1984); Att’y Gen. v. Assistant Comm’r of Real Prop. Dep’t, 380 Mass. 623, 625 (1980). Therefore, determinations must be made on a case-by-case basis. This exemption does not protect all data relating to specifically named individuals. Rather, there are factors to consider when assessing the weight of the privacy interest at stake: (1) whether disclosure would result in personal embarrassment to an individual of normal sensibilities; (2) whether the materials sought contain intimate details of a highly personal nature; and (3) whether the same information is available from other sources. See People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) v. Dep’t of Agric. Res., 477 Mass. 280, 292 (2017). When analyzing a privacy claim, there is a balancing test which provides that where the public interest in obtaining the requested information substantially outweighs the seriousness of any invasion of privacy, the private interest in preventing disclosure must yield. PETA, 477 Mass. at 291. The public has a recognized interest in knowing whether public servants are carrying out their duties in a law abiding and efficient manner. Id. at 292.

Allison Mondello SPR24/0475 Page 3 February 29, 2024 Under Exemption (c), the Department argues the following: [T]he Department has removed the troopers’ dates of birth pursuant to G.L. c. 4, § 7 cl. 26(c), which exempts from disclosure “personnel and medical files or information and any other materials or data relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy”. Based on the Department’s response, where the responsive records apparently relate to law enforcement misconduct investigations, it is unclear how Exemption (c) could apply to redact any part of the records. See G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c). Additionally, based on the Department’s response, it is unclear how dates of birth are intimate details of a highly personal nature nor how disclosure would result in personal embarrassment to an individual of normal sensibilities. See PETA, 477 Mass. at 292. Consequently, the Department has not met its burden to redact the dates of birth of police officers pursuant to Exemption (c). Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. Wallack 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 the response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Todd Wallack