Patrick J. Mason v. Pittsfield, City of - Police Department (SPR 20243424)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records January 7, 2025 SPR24/3424 Abigail Hunt Records Access Officer Pittsfield Police Department 39 Allen Street Pittsfield, MA 01201 Dear Ms. Hunt: I have received the petition of Patrick Mason appealing the response of the Pittsfield 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 October 28, 2024, Mr. Mason requested the following: [1] McDonald’s Video Surveillance property number [identified file number][;] [2] U-Haul Video Surveillance property number [identified file number][;] [3] Flash Drive (photo) property number [identified file number]. Previous Appeals This request was the subject of previous appeals. See SPR24/3080 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (November 14, 2024) and SPR24/3122 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (December 3, 2024). In my December 3rd determination, I ordered the Department to clarify whether it possesses responsive records. Subsequently, the Department responded on December 20, 2024. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, Mr. Mason petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR24/3424, 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, 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

Abigail Hunt SPR24/3424 Page 2 January 7, 2025 § 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 Department’s December 20th Response In its December 20, 2024 response, the Department states the following: The requested material may be available as part of the DISCOVERY process through the District Attorney’s Office or the court handling the case(s). [emphasis in original] Burden of Specificity In this case, the Department has not met its burden in responding to the request. The Department is advised that under the Public Records Law, the burden shall be on the custodian to establish the applicability of an exemption to withhold or redact records. Based on the Department’s response, it is unclear which exemption the Department is citing in order to withhold the requested records. Additionally, it is unclear which specific records the Department intends to withhold. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv) (a written response must “identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based”). See also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Police Comm’r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); Flatley, 419 Mass. at 511; Reinstein v. Police Comm’r of Boston, 378 Mass. 281, 289-90 (1979) (the statutory exemptions are narrowly construed and are not blanket in nature). Consequently, the Department must identify the records or categories of records that it intends to withhold, and explain the specific exemption or exemptions that apply. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. Mason with a response to the 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.

Abigail Hunt SPR24/3424 Page 3 January 7, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Patrick J. Mason