Juliana Estime v. Barnstable, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20251712)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records June 17, 2025 SPR25/1712 Danielle L. Paradis Records/Property Supervisor Barnstable Police Department 1200 Phinney’s Lane Hyannis, MA 02601 Dear Ms. Paradis: I have received the petition of Juliana Estime appealing the response of the Barnstable 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 28, 2025, Ms. Estime requested: [1] [The] names of officers who spoke with [an identified individual][;] [2] [The] [d]ate and time [of the above conversation][.] On June 1, 2025, Ms. Estime submitted a second request seeking “the names of the two officers who ‘visited’ and ‘informed’ [an identified individual]…I want the time and date.” The Department responded on June 11, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Ms. Estime petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/1712, 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. Att’y for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of 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

Danielle L. Paradis SPR25/1712 Page 2 June 17, 2025 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 June 11th Response In its June 11, 2025 response, the Department stated “…the Department does not have any records that are responsive to your specific request[.]” Current Appeal In her appeal, Ms. Estime indicated that the Department had not fulfilled her request. In a June 16, 2025 telephone conversation between a staff member of the Public Records Division and the Department, the Department confirmed that it did not possess any responsive records. No Duty to Create Records Under the Public Records Law, the Department is not required to create a record in response to a public records request. See G. L. c. 66, § 6A(d); 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). In addition, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). 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). Conclusion Given that the Department possesses no records responsive to the requests and this office has no authority to compel the Department to create records, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. If Ms. Estime 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).

Danielle L. Paradis SPR25/1712 Page 3 June 17, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Juliana Estime