James Murphy v. Quincy, City of - Police Department (SPR 20252050)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records July 18, 2025 SPR25/2050 Lieutenant Terence McDonnell Records Access Officer Quincy Police Department 1 Sea Street Quincy, MA 02169 Dear Lieutenant McDonnell: On July 15, 2025, this office received your petition on behalf of the Quincy Police Department (Department) seeking relief from the obligation to produce responsive 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, I understand that the Department furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor, James Murphy. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). From May 16, 2025 through July 7, 2025, Mr. Murphy submitted approximately 14 requests for records, including, among other things, requests for incident reports, copies of 911 calls, “all reports created by” numerous identified officers, “applications for authorization for temporary involuntary hospitalizations,” and witness reports. Petitions for an Extension of Time and for Relief from the Obligation to provide Records 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 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 Terence McDonnell SPR25/2050 Page 2 July 18, 2025 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) shall provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(b). Request for Relief In its petition, the Department requests the following: Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 66, section 10, subsection c, and in accordance with the decision of Bruce Friedman v. Division of Administrative Law Appeals & another, 103 Mass. App. Ct. 806 (2024) on the reasonableness standard of public records requests, we believe that the number and complexity of the public records requests regarding a single incident (14) submitted by the Requester (James Murphy) in a short time period (35 business days) amounts to an intent to harass, intimidate, and burden the Quincy Police Department without serving any legitimate public interest. The following facts support the conclusion that these requests are not made in good faith and are intended to harass or intimidate the records access officer and the Quincy Police Department: 1. Pattern of Excessive Requests regarding a single incident with no apparent purpose (14 in 35 business days) 2. No apparent Public Interest or Concern 3. Disruption of the Agency’s Law Enforcement Function Pursuant to the above-mentioned chapter and section, the Quincy Police Department respectfully requests that the Supervisor of Public Records relieve the agency of its obligation to respond to the four most recent requests (3 received July 1st & 1 received July 8th), as well as, any future requests submitted by Mr. Murphy. Based on the information provided in the Department’s petition, I find that the Department has not demonstrated that the requests are frivolous and not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, as

Lieutenant Terence McDonnell SPR25/2050 Page 3 July 18, 2025 required by G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). Please note, the Supervisor of Records lacks the authority to relieve records custodians from the obligation of responding to prospective requests. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(c) (“If the supervisor of records 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 of records may grant a longer extension or relieve the agency or municipality of its obligation to provide copies of the records sought.”(emphasis added)). Conclusion Accordingly, I am unable to grant Department’s request for relief from the obligation to produce responsive records. Please be aware, this office may deny an appeal if, in the opinion of the Supervisor of Records, the request is designed or intended to harass, intimidate, or assist in the commission of a crime. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b)(2). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: James Murphy