Joel Mroz v. Boston, City of - Public Records (SPR 20240490)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records February 29, 2024 SPR24/0490 Shawn A. Williams, Esq. Director of Public Records Records Access Officer City of Boston One City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney Williams: I have received the petition of Joel Mroz, 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 October 30, 2023, Mr. Mroz requested, “[a] list of all residents who are part of the BPD’s NWU’s Fenway Neighborhood Watch Group.” Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR23/2623 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (November 10, 2023). In my November 10th determination, I found that it was unclear if the City possessed any records responsive to the request. The City responded on November 27, 2023. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Mr. Mroz petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR24/0490, 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). 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 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. SPR24/0490 Page 2 February 29, 2024 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. The City’s November 27th Response In its November 27, 2023 response, the City stated, “BPD states that no records exist that are responsive to this request. BPD does not keep records of all the members of its NWU Fenway Neighborhood Watch Group.” Subsequent to the opening of this appeal, the City responded on February 15, 2024, and stated, “I have alerted representatives from the Police department regarding this matter in an effort to resolve any outstanding issues regarding your October 30, 2023 public records request. I will provide an update to you once additional information is provided to me by the department.” Current appeal In his appeal, Mr. Mroz states: I submit this appeal to the Public Records Division of the Secretary of the Commonwealth for the following reasons: [1.] The Boston Police Department’s Neighborhood Watch Unit page (https://police.boston.gov/nwu/) contains a form for submittal and capture of the following information: [a.] Start A Neighborhood Watch Group [b.] Name (Required) [c.] First Name [d.] Last Name [e.] Email Address (Required) [f.] Name of the Crime Watch Group [g.] Name of Neighborhood [h.] Contact Phone Number … [2.] I submit this Public Records Request by amending my former request… to “The Boston Police Department Neighborhood Watch Unit’s contact list for the Fenway Neighborhood.” On February 15, 2024, in response to the City’s February 15th email, Mr. Mroz stated, “[s]ince the current Public Records Request Appeal of February 12, 2024… has amended that original Public Records Request of October 30, 2023… please note that your alert to representatives from the Boston Police Department regarding this matter should reference the amended Public Request Appeal of February 12, 2024…”

Shawn A. Williams, Esq. SPR24/0490 Page 3 February 29, 2024 Based on Mr. Mroz’s appeal and the City’s February 15th response, it is unclear if the City possesses any records responsive to the October 30th 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 City must clarify whether it possesses records responsive to the request. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Mr. Mroz 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 this response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Mr. Mroz may appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). If Mr. Mroz wishes to submit an additional public records request to the City containing the amended language in his appeal, and is unsatisfied with the response, he may appeal that response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Joel Mroz