Martha Gartland v. Wellesley, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20251208)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records May 12, 2025 SPR25/1208 Cheryl Carlson Records Manager Wellesley Police Department 485 Washington Street Wellesley, MA 02482 Dear Ms. Carlson: I have received the petition of Martha Gartland appealing the response of the Wellesley 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 March 11, 2025, via first class mail, Ms. Gartland requested a “report of March 1, 2025, regarding an incident that occurred between 5:00PM and 6:30PM at . . . Grove Street, Wellesley[.]” Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR25/0793 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (April 3, 2025). In my April 3rd determination, I found that the Department did not meet its burden to withhold a responsive record under Exemption (c) of the Public Records Law. Subsequently, the Department responded on April 7, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, Mr. Gartland petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR25/1208, 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) (written response must “identify 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

Cheryl Carlson SPR25/1208 Page 2 May 12, 2025 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…”); 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). 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. Current Appeal In her May 1, 2025 appeal, Ms. Gartland references the previous appeal regarding this request and states, “[t]hrough your office, I appealed the original denial of Wellesley Police Department of my request for records regarding [sic] March 1, 2025 incident at . . . Grove St., Wellesley, MA.” She further notes, “[a]fter intervention from your office, Wellesley Police Department provided me with a REDACTED Copy attached. The copy is so heavily redacted as to make it unintelligible.” The Department’s Responses In its previous response, the Department identified one responsive police report in its possession and cited Exemption (c) of the Public Records Law to withhold the responsive in its entirety. In its April 7, 2025 response, the Department provided Ms. Gartland with a responsive record in the form of a two-page report containing redacted information. It is my understanding that the Department did not cite an exemption in support of its redactions. Burden of Specificity for Withholding or Redacting Records Based on the Department’s response, it is unclear which exemption the Department is citing in order to redact the responsive record. 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 clarify which exemption of the Public Records Law it is claiming in order to redact the responsive record and provide the specific reasons for any withholding. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Ms. Gartland with a response to her

Cheryl Carlson SPR25/1208 Page 3 May 12, 2025 request 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. Gartland may appeal the substantive nature of the Department’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Martha Gartland