Emmanuel C. Williams v. Massachusetts Parole Board (SPR 20251784)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records July 2, 2025 SPR25/1784 Attorney Andrew Doherty Records Access Officer Massachusetts Parole Board 12 Mercer Road Natick, MA 01760 Dear Attorney Doherty: I have received the petition of Emmanuel C. Williams, on behalf of Keneya Onuaguluchi, both of the Transformational Prison Project (TPP), appealing the response of the Massachusetts Parole Board (Board) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On February 20, 2025, Ms. Onuaguluchi queried, [1] Out of [the] 167 applications for parole termination, how many…were made by juvenile lifers? [2] Out of [the] 19 that were granted, how many…were juvenile lifers? The Board responded on March 25, 2025. Unsatisfied by the response, Mr. Williams petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/1784, 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 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

Attorney Andrew Doherty SPR25/1784 Page 2 July 2, 2025 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 Board’s March 25th Response In its March 25, 2025 response, the Board stated: … the Parole Board is unable to respond to this request because, although the Research and Planning Unit can analyze Parole Board data as it exists currently, the Unit cannot feasibly conduct an analysis of the data previously produced to you. However, even if you were to request an analysis based on the current, rather than historical, number of termination applications and granted applications, the Research and Planning Unit would not feasibly be able to conduct the analysis you are seeking due to the complexity of the extraction and analysis involved, the extraordinary amount of time and resources necessary to produce this information, and most importantly, the significant likelihood that necessary information would be missing from the data. Current Appeal In his appeal to this office, Mr. Williams stated: …the Parole Board claimed that it is “unable to respond” and it “cannot feasibly conduct an analysis of the data previously produced to you.” This is the specific denial that TPP is appealing… …in its March 25, 2025 letter, the Board admits that it is capable of identifying the number of “juvenile lifers” in the system…Since the Board can identify the number of “juvenile lifers” it is currently supervising, it follows that the [B]oard can identify the number of “juvenile lifers” on the Board’s own March 20, 2024 chart… No Duty to Answer Questions Mr. Williams is advised that the duty to comply with requests for records extends only 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). Pursuant to the Public Records Law, a custodian 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).

Attorney Andrew Doherty SPR25/1784 Page 3 July 2, 2025 Where Mr. Williams’ request constitute a list of questions, I find that the Board has no duty under the Public Records Law to answer such questions. Conclusion Accordingly, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. If Mr. Williams 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: Emmanuel C. Williams