Elise Lambert v. Boston, City of - Police Department (SPR 20242129)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records August 7, 2024 SPR24/2129 Shawn A. Williams, Esq. Director of Public Records City of Boston One City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney Williams: I have received the petition of Elise Lambert, of the Committee for Public Counsel Services, Strategic Litigation Unit (CPCS), 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 May 22, 2024, Ms. Lambert requested: [1] A list of all police officers employed by Boston Police Department since January 1, 2015, with the following information: (a) Employee Identification number (b) Full name (c) Badge number (d) Rank (e) Status (i.e, “active” or “suspended with pay”) (f) Date the individual joined the Boston Police Department (g) Date the individual left the Boston Police Department (if applicable) [2] Any existing documentation on how the Boston Police Department assigns and tracks officer ID numbers (employee IDs, badge numbers, etc.), including changes to these ID numbers over time. On June 6, 2024, the City provided a response. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Ms. Lambert petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR24/2129, was opened as a result. While this appeal was pending, the City provided a supplemental response on August 2, 2024. 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. SPR24/2129 Page 2 August 7, 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 June 6th and August 2nd responses In its June 6, 2024 response, the City asserted, “[d]ue to the nature of your request additional time is needed. As such, the City will need up to, but no more than, fifteen (15) additional business days to review and process your request.” In its August 2, 2024 supplemental response, a representative of the City stated, “[y]ou are appealing the Department’s nonresponse to this request. Please be assured that the Department is working diligently to locate records responsive to your request. The Department has reached out to its appropriate human resources department to locate your records. The Department should have a response to you by the week of August 12th as it may take time to put this record together.” Current Appeal In her July 26, 2024 petition to this office, Ms. Lambert asserts, “…[w]e filed our initial public request on May 22, 2024 and as of today have not received any response or records from the [Police Department]…” Timeliness of 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

Shawn A. Williams, Esq. SPR24/2129 Page 3 August 7, 2024 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. Lambert submitted her request on May 22, 2024, it is unclear why the City has not provided any of 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). Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Ms. Lambert 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. Lambert 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: Elise Lambert