David Webb v. Worcester, City of - Law Department (SPR 20251638)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records June 24, 2025 SPR25/1638 Janice E. Thompson, Esq. Assistant City Solicitor Law Department City of Worcester 455 Main Street, Room 301 Worcester, MA 01608 Dear Attorney Thompson: I have received the petition of David Webb appealing the response of the City of Worcester (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On May 11, 2025, Mr. Webb sought, “[an identified officer’s] bodyworn camera for the entire interaction, as well as footage from another officer that includes the entire interview with the three tow truck drivers at [an identified address] Ave [on] April 15th[.]” The City responded on May 11, 2025 and May 27, 2025, assigning the request reference number P070162-051125. Unsatisfied with the responses, Mr. Webb petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/1638, 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. 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

Janice E. Thompson, Esq. SPR25/1638 Page 2 June 24, 2025 If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. See 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 May 11th and May 27th Response In its May 11, 2025 response, the City stated, “[y]our request has been received by City of Worcester and is being processed in accordance with the Massachusetts Public Records Law. Your request was created on 5/11/2025 and given the reference number P070162-051125 for tracking purposes.” In its May 27, 2025 response, the City stated, “[t]hese records have been provided and/or are being prepared in response to your prior request, P069022-041625. The City will provide the same records in response to this request once all associated work is complete; additional time is required to complete the work on the BWC. You expect to receive the full response to this request this week.” Current Appeal In his June 10, 2025 petition to this office, Mr. Webb stated, “…as it has now been nineteen business days and the [C]ity has not provided responsive records or cited a lawful reason to withhold them…I am appealing…” Timeframe for Providing Records G. L. c. 66, § 10(b) provides, in pertinent part, that if the magnitude or difficulty of a 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 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 Mr. Webb submitted his request on May 11, 2025, and the City has not provided responsive records, I find the City has not met its burden in responding to the request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b). Consequently, the City must provide an estimated date as to when it intends to complete the search and provide the responsive records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the City must provide responsive records on a rolling basis.

Janice E. Thompson, Esq. SPR25/1638 Page 3 June 24, 2025 Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Mr. Webb 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. Mr. Webb may appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: David Webb