Leia Buffaloe v. Arlington, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20252242)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records August 14, 2025 SPR25/2242 Suzanne Trunfio Social Media Coordinator/Senior Records Clerk Arlington Police Department 112 Mystic Street Arlington, MA 02474 Dear Ms. Trunfio: I have received the petition of Leia Buffaloe appealing the response of the Arlington 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 20, 2025, Ms. Buffaloe requested, “access to any records pertaining to [an identified individual] specifically related to”: [1] Any report or documentation classifying her as a runaway or missing person in or around 1991, [2] Any confirmation of her return or case closure, [3] And any school enrollment or attendance records that may confirm the last year she attended school in Arlington[.] Prior Appeal This request was the subject of a prior appeal. See SPR25/1880 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (July 15, 2025). In my July 15th determination, I found that it was unclear how the responsive records are the type contemplated under G. L. c. 119, § 60A. Specifically, it was unclear how the withheld records constitute “records of the court in cases of delinquency arising under sections fifty-two to fifty-nine,” as required by the statute. The Department provided a response on July 31, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Ms. Buffaloe petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2242, 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 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

Suzanne Trunfio SPR25/2242 Page 2 August 14, 2025 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. 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 July 31st Response In its July 31, 2025 response, the Department cited Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law to withhold the requested records in their entirety. Current appeal In her appeal, Ms. Buffaloe asserts, “[m]y request is focused solely on local records held by the Arlington Police Department, including any missing persons report, documentation related to case closure, or relevant school records that could clarify a timeline. The letter also states that the case was resolved. I’m not disputing that might be true, but I believe the manner in which it was resolved should be reflected in the public record. If there is documentation confirming how the case was closed—when, why, or under what circumstances—that information is relevant and responsive to my original request.” 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, 545-46 (1977).

Suzanne Trunfio SPR25/2242 Page 3 August 14, 2025 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.” 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 cites G. L. c. 22A, § 4, which states in pertinent part as follows: Whenever a parent, guardian, or governmental unit responsible for a child, reports to any police officer or law enforcement official that a child is missing, such police officer or official shall immediately cause to be entered into the central register relevant information relative to said missing child. Such police officer or law enforcement official shall also immediately undertake to locate such missing child. Police officers, law enforcement officials and others so designated by the colonel of state police solely for the purpose of locating a missing child shall have access to the fingerprints and other data and information concerning the missing child on file with the central register. G. L. c. 22A, § 4. In its response, the Department states, Here, the records sought for the Juvenile do not involve an indictment that would otherwise subject them to public disclosure; nor, admittedly, are the records related to any juvenile delinquency matters. However, the records sought in the Request relate to the Juvenile’s missing persons case, which was resolved. The Requester’s assertion that the matter is unresolved is inaccurate based on the information presently available to the Town. Although the Juvenile Records Statute may not be squarely applicable to the Town’s denial of the Request, another state law contemplates that these records are not subject to public disclosure. See M.G.L. ch. 22A, § 4 . . . Based upon the Department’s July 31st response, I find that the Department must clarify whether there are any other responsive records solely in the Department’s possession that are not on file with the central register.

Suzanne Trunfio SPR25/2242 Page 4 August 14, 2025 Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Ms. Buffaloe with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten 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. Buffaloe may appeal the substantive nature of the Department’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Leia Buffaloe