Michelle Efendi v. Boston, City of - Public Records (SPR 20240851)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 2, 2024 SPR24/0851 Shawn A. Williams, Esq. Records Access Officer City of Boston One City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney Williams: I have received the petition of Michelle Efendi 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 January 23, 2024, Ms. Efendi requested, “all records concerning [an identified individual] from June 22, 2022 to June 25, 2022.” Prior Appeal The requested records were the subject of a prior appeal. See SPR24/0409 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (February 20, 2024). In my February 20th determination, I ordered the City to provide Ms. Efendi with a response to her request. On February 27, 2024, the City provided a response, stating, “[t]he Boston Police Department (Department) received your request for public records. This letter shall act as the response to your request for public records…” On the same day, Ms. Efendi emailed the City asserting, “I did not ask for just police records. I asked for all records from the [City]. I am not satisfied that there is only one police incident report. I am requesting a comprehensive search to be completed by the [City].” In an email to Ms. Efendi, the City’s Records Access Officer, Shawn A. Williams, Esq., emailed her stating, “[g]ood Afternoon Michelle: I will follow up on this for you.” Subsequently, Ms. Efendi petitioned this office, and the current appeal was opened. Ms. Efendi asserts, “…the records release they gave me was NOT a comprehensive records search…” 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. SPR24/0851 Page 2 April 2, 2024 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 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 March 21st response Subsequent to the opening of this appeal, the City provided a response on March 21, 2024, asserting, “[t]he [City] has received a copy of your petition to the [Supervisor], related to your request for public records. In your request, you stated: I am requesting all records concerning [an identified individual] from June 22, 2022 to June 25, 2022. [We] have alerted representatives from the Police [D]epartment (Department) regarding this matter in an effort to resolve any outstanding issues regarding your January 23, 2024 public records request. I will provide an update to you once additional information is provided to me by the [D]epartment.” Upon receipt of the City’s March 21st response, Ms. Efendi emailed the City stating, “[a]gain, I am not looking for just police records. I have asked for all records…” Additional Responsive Records Please be advised that, the duty to comply with requests for records extends to those records that exist and are in possession, custody, or control of the custodian of records at the time of the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(ii). Additionally, in accordance with the Public Records Law, 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). Based on Ms. Efendi’s appeal, in conjunction with the City’s responses, it is unclear if the City possesses additional records that may be responsive to the request. The City must clarify this matter.

Shawn A. Williams, Esq. SPR24/0851 Page 3 April 2, 2024 Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Ms. Efendi with a response to her 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. Ms. Efendi may appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Michelle Efendi