Praagna Kashyap v. Middlesex County Sheriff's Office (SPR 20241468)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records May 29, 2024 SPR24/1468 Malav Patel, Esq. Associate Legal Counsel Middlesex County Sheriff’s Office 12 Gill Street, Suite 4700 Woburn, MA 01801 Dear Attorney Patel: I have received the petition of Praagna Kashyap appealing the response of the Middlesex County Sheriff’s Office (Office) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On April 10, 2024, Ms. Kashyap requested, “records from August 2023 to present containing the number of phone calls, video calls, and emails per month from correctional facilities in the county, as well as the phone call minutes and video call minutes.” The Office provided a response on April 24, 2024. Unsatisfied with the response, Ms. Kashyap petitioned the Supervisor of Records and this appeal, SPR24/1468, was opened. 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. 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

Malav Patel, Esq. SPR24/1468 Page 2 May 29, 2024 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 Office’s April 24th response In its February 5, 2024 response, the Office stated, “[o]ur office intends on responding to your request however, requires additional time to do so.” Timeliness in Providing Records G. L. c. 66, § 10(b) provides, in pertinent part, that if the magnitude or difficulty of the request unduly burdens the other responsibilities of the agency or municipality such that the agency or municipality cannot provide records within 10 business days, the agency or municipality must inform the requestor in writing within 10 business days. With respect to the timeframe to produce responsive records, the written response shall: identify a reasonable timeframe in which the agency or municipality shall produce the public records sought; provided, that for an agency, the timeframe shall not exceed 15 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records and for a municipality the timeframe shall not exceed 25 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records; and provided further, that the requestor may voluntarily agree to a response date beyond the timeframes set forth herein. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Where Ms. Kashyap submitted her request on April 10, 2024, it is unclear why the Office has not provided the responsive records. 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); see also G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). The Office must provide Ms. Kashyap with a production schedule in which the Office will commence providing the responsive records. If possible the records should be provided on a rolling basis to Ms. Kashyap. Conclusion Accordingly, the Office is ordered to provide Ms. Kashyap 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. Kashyap may appeal the substantive nature of the Office’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1).

Malav Patel, Esq. SPR24/1468 Page 3 May 29, 2024 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Praagna Kashyap