David Chritson v. Somerville, City of (SPR 20251112)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records May 7, 2025 SPR25/1112 David Shapiro, Esq. Deputy City Solicitor City of Somerville – Law Department 93 Highland Avenue Somerville, MA 02143 Dear Attorney Shapiro: I have received the petition of David Chritson appealing the response of the City of Somerville (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On January 17, 2025, Mr. Chritson requested “all public records related to the policies, practices, procedures, and/or processes -- of the City of Somerville, the Somerville Police Department, and the Somerville Fire Department -- for amending and/or supplementing inaccurate public records.” Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR25/0642 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (March 20, 2025). In my March 20th determination, I closed SPR25/0642 in light of the City providing a supplemental response on March 17, 2025. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Mr. Chritson petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR25/1112, 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. 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

David Shapiro, Esq. SPR25/1112 Page 2 May 7, 2025 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 January 28th and March 17th Responses In its January 28, 2025 and March 17, 2025 responses, the City provided copies of emails with the Police Department and Fire Department, and stated it had no responsive records. Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Chritson contends that “on January 28, 2025, the City deceptively claimed that there are ‘no records responsive to [the] request,’ and failed to furnish records related to policies, practices, procedure, and/or processes for addressing or supplementing inaccurate reports fabricated by SPD and SFD.” Further, he asks that this office “order the City to produce all responsive records and segregable non-exempt portions thereof immediately.” Records in Existence; No Duty to Create Documents Please be advised that 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). Under the Public Records Law, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). 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). In its March 17th response, the City states the following: The City hereby confirms we have no records responsive to Mr. Chritson’s request made on 1/17/2025. The emails from . . . Law Department to the Somerville Police Department and Somerville Fire Department were follow-ups to prior conversations in which it was communicated to [the Law Department] that there were no responsive records. Where the City confirmed that it does not possess records responsive to Mr. Chritson’s request, I find that the City has met its burden in responding to this request.

David Shapiro, Esq. SPR25/1112 Page 3 May 7, 2025 Conclusion Consequently, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. If Mr. Chritson is not satisfied with the resolution of this administrative appeal, please be advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(b)(ix), 10A(c) (pursuing administrative appeal does not limit availability of judicial remedies). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: David Chritson