James M. Crowley v. Cambridge, City of - Office of the City Clerk (SPR 20252039)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records July 18, 2025 SPR25/2039 Seah Levy Public Records Access Officer City of Cambridge 795 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02139 Dear Ms. Levy: On June 30, 2025, this office received your petition on behalf of the City of Cambridge (City) seeking an extension of time to produce records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). As required by law, it is my understanding that the Town furnished a copy of the petition to the requestor, James Crowley. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On June 17, 2025, Mr. Crowley requested, “copies of all emails, correspondence, reports, notes, photographs, recording, and any other item related to, created as a result of, or provided in connection with Cambridge Police Department Professional Standards Unit, Staff Investigation SI-2018-004.” On July 1, 2025, Mr. Crowley provided a specific search term as clarification. Please note that in a letter to this Office dated July 14, 2025, Mr. Crowley objected to the City’s petition. Previous and Open Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR25/1915 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (July 15, 2025). In my July 15th determination, I found that the City had provided a further response to Mr. Crowley on July 14, 2025. Concurrent with the opening of this petition, Mr. Crowley appealed the City’s July 14th response. See SPR25/2040. A determination will be issued separately within ten business days of receipt of the appeal. 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

Seah Levy SPR25/2039 Page 2 July 18, 2025 Petition for an Extension of Time Under the Public Records Law, upon a showing of good cause, the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) may grant a single extension to an agency not to exceed 20 business days and a single extension to a municipality not to exceed 30 business days. In determining whether there has been a showing of good cause, the Supervisor shall consider, but shall not be limited to considering: (i) the need to search for, collect, segregate or examine records; (ii) the scope of redaction required to prevent unlawful disclosure; (iii) the capacity or the normal business hours of operation of the agency or municipality to produce the request without the extension; (iv) efforts undertaken by the agency or municipality in fulfilling the current request and previous requests; (v) whether the request, either individually or as part of a series of requests from the same requestor, is frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality; and (vi) the public interest served by expeditious disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). If the Supervisor determines that the request is part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass, and the requests are not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, the Supervisor may grant a longer extension or relieve the agency or municipality of its obligation to provide copies of the records sought. Id. The filing of a petition does not affect the requirement that a Records Access Officer (RAO) must provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 36.06(4)(b). Current Petition In its petition, the City requests an extension of 40 business days and argues the following in support of its request: The records in question contain materials including attorney-client privileged documents and emails, as well as an extensive number of emails and reports from the Cambridge Police Department. The records in question involve personnel who work in sensitive areas, such as the Domestic Violence Unit and Criminal Investigation Section. Included in these records are materials that contain references to, and information regard, matters of sexual assault, rape, domestic violence, and child abuse. The City anticipates redactions pursuant to law, including, but not limited to, G.L. c 41, § 97D, G. L. c. 119, § 51F, and G. L. c. 6, § 167. Also present is information exempt pursuant to the Public Records law,

Seah Levy SPR25/2039 Page 3 July 18, 2025 including the identity of reporting witnesses, medical information, personnel information, and information of a personal and intimate nature. Based upon a review of these records, and the work on the records in question to determine the pace of redactions to these records, the City anticipates that this response will require a minimum of 270 hours of work. To assist in producing a faster response, the City has also provided, within the cost estimate, some suggestions as to how to narrow this request to reduce fees and speed up the final production. In light of the need to collect, segregate and examine the records, as well as the capacity of the City to produce the records without an extension, the City has established good cause to permit an extension of time. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c)(i)-(iii). The City is granted an extension of 30 business days. Conclusion As described above, I find that the City has established good cause for a time extension of 30 business days. To the extent possible, the City must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Please note, Mr. Crowley has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the appropriate superior court. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(c), 10(d)(iv)(4), 10A(c). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: James Crowley