Michelle Efendi v. Boston, City of - Public Records (SPR 20240935)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 5, 2024 SPR24/0935 Shawn A. Williams, Esq. Records Access Officer City of Boston 1 City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney Williams: I have received the petition of Michelle Efendi appealing the response of the Boston Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On February 16, 2024, Ms. Efendi requested “…all police reports involving [an identified individual]. These may include offense/incident reports. I am seeking reports between the dates January 1, 2022 - June 30, 2022.” Prior Appeal This request was the subject of a prior appeal. See SPR24/0738 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (March 20, 2024). In my March 20th determination, I ordered the City to provide Ms. Efendi with a response. The City responded on March 22, 2024. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Ms. Efendi petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR24/0935, 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. SPR24/0935 Page 2 April 5, 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 March 22nd response In its March 22, 2024 response, the City advised, “[t]he Department located one report in its system that is responsive to your request. The Public Service Unit has provided this report to you on three separate occasions ... on 02/15/2024 ... on 02/19/2024 and ... on 02/20/24 ... No records were withheld.” Current appeal In her appeal, Ms. Efendi states, [the City] claim[s] they already gave me these records in other responses. This is unacceptable and proves they are only committed to wasting my time. I am asking for records for this response. I should not need to look through old responses and try and deduce via redacted reports which one may be the accurate report for the matter I am seeking.” Pursuant to 950 CMR 32.07(1)(a), “... a requester shall be entitled to receive in hand, by mail, by facsimile or electronically one copy of a public record or any desired portion of a public record.” As Ms. Efendi has received the requested record, I find that the City has met its burden in responding to this public records request. Conclusion Accordingly, this administrative appeal is now closed. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Michelle Efendi