← Back to Search
Sharon Jordan v. Lunenburg, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20251941)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 07-07-2025
ClosedAppealPetitioner Won
SPR 20251941 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Sharon Jordan concerning records held by Lunenburg, Town of - Police Department, opened 07-07-2025. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20251941
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Sharon Jordan
- Date Opened
- 07-07-2025
- Date Closed
- 07-14-2025
- Date Request Submitted
- 06-09-2025
- Response Provided Date
- 06-13-2025
- Processing Fees Charged
- 0.00
- Petitions Regarding Fees
- No
- Time to Comply
- 0 Business Days
- Went to Court
- No
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records July 14, 2025 SPR25/1941 Lieutenant Sean Zrate Records Access Officer Lunenburg Police Department 655 Massachusetts Avenue Lunenburg, MA 01462 Dear Lieutenant Zrate: I have received the petition of Sharon Jordan appealing the response of the Lunenburg 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 June 9, 2025, Ms. Jordan requested, “…a police report on 6-6-2[0]25 & any related events [for a] 911 call of domestic violence incident [at] [a specified address]. Please include: incident reports[;] dispatch audit logs[;] officer narratives[.]” The Department responded on June 13, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Ms. Jordan petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/1941, 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 Lieutenant Sean Zrate SPR25/1941 Page 2 July 14, 2025 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. Status of the Requestor Please note that under the Public Records Law the reason for which a requestor seeks access to or a copy of a public record does not afford any greater right of access to the requested information than other persons in the general public. The Public Records Law does not distinguish between requestors. Access to a record pursuant to the Public Records Law rests on the content of the record and not the circumstances of the requestor. See Bougas v. Chief of Police of Lexington, 371 Mass. 59, 64 (1976). Accordingly, Ms. Jordan’s status will play no role in a determination as to whether the records should be disclosed or withheld under the Public Records Law. The Department’s June 13th Response In its June 13, 2025 response, the Department cited Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law to withhold “all records” in their entirety. Current Appeal In her appeal to this office, Ms. Jordan stated, “[w]e would like to have that June 6 record…We are not just the public… We were directly addressed by [an identified individual] during that event…” Exemption (a) Exemption (a), known as the statutory exemption, permits the withholding of records that are: specifically or by necessary implication exempted from disclosure by statute G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(a). A governmental entity may use the statutory exemption as a basis for withholding requested materials where the language of the exempting statute relied upon expressly or necessarily implies that the public’s right to inspect records under the Public Records Law is restricted. See Att’y Gen. v. Collector of Lynn, 377 Mass. 151, 154 (1979); Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. v. Appeals Court, 372 Mass. 539, 545-546 (1977). This exemption creates two categories of exempt records. The first category includes records that are specifically exempt from disclosure by statute. Such statutes expressly state that such a record either “shall not be a public record,” “shall be kept confidential” or “shall not be subject to the disclosure provision of the Public Records Law.” Lieutenant Sean Zrate SPR25/1941 Page 3 July 14, 2025 The second category under the exemption includes records deemed exempt under statute by necessary implication. Such statutes expressly limit the dissemination of particular records to a defined group of individuals or entities. A statute is not a basis for exemption if it merely lists individuals or entities to whom the records are to be provided; the statute must expressly limit access to the listed individuals or entities. In its response, the Department cited G. L. c. 41, § 97D, indicating that the requested records are exempt from disclosure. G. L. c. 41, § 97D provides in pertinent part: All reports of rape and sexual assault or attempts to commit such offenses, all reports of abuse perpetrated by family or household members, as defined in section 1 of chapter 209A, and all communications between police officers and victims of such offenses or abuse shall not be public reports and shall be maintained by the police departments in a manner that shall assure their confidentiality… G. L. c. 41, § 97D. Based upon the Department’s response, it is unclear how the requested records fall within the type of records contemplated in G. L. c. 41, § 97D. The Department merely cites G. L. c. 41, § 97D, without any further explanation as to the statute’s applicability to the responsive records. A records custodian is required to not only cite an exemption but to specifically explain the applicability of the exemption to the requested records for compliance with the Public Records Law. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv). The Department must clarify this matter. Additionally, it is unclear from the Department’s response what records it possesses which are responsive to Ms. Jordan’s request. To deny access to a record under the Public Records Law, a records access officer must identify the record, categories of records, or portions of the record it intends to withhold. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3)(c)(4). Therefore, the Department must identify the records in its possession that it is withholding under Exemption (a). Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Ms. Jordan with a response to this 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. Ms. Jordan may appeal the substantive nature of the Department’s response within ninety (90) days. See C.M.R. 32.08(1). Lieutenant Sean Zrate SPR25/1941 Page 4 July 14, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Sharon Jordan