David Zuares v. Department of State Police (SPR 20252280)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records August 12, 2025 SPR25/2280 Allison Mondello Record Access Officer Department of State Police 50 Maple Street Milford, MA 01757 Dear Ms. Mondello: I have received the petition of David J. Zuares, Esq., of Murphy & Riley, P.C., appealing the response of the Department of State Police (Department) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On January 24, 2025, Attorney Zuares requested the following: Any and all documents, reports and/or videos relating to a response to an incident on September 16, 2021, involving [an identified individual] including but not limited to 911 recordings, video recordings including body-cam video recordings, photographs, police reports, notes, investigative materials, incident reports, accident reports, dispatch logs, witness statements or summaries, interview notes, audio recordings, citations, and correspondence. On February 10, 2025, Attorney Zuares resubmitted his request to the Department. The Department responded on February 10, 2025, March 19, 2025, and June 25, 2025, assigning the request reference number P001604-021025. Unsatisfied with the responses, Attorney Zuares petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2280, 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). 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

Allison Mondello SPR25/2280 Page 2 August 12, 2025 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. See 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 February 10th, March 19th, and June 25th Responses On February 10, 2025, the Department stated, “[w]hen a new public record request is entered into our system an automatic reference number stating with a ‘P’ is generated and provided to the requestor. Based on the information you provided we have no record of an existing request in our system…Submit your request via our online portal…” Subsequently, on February 10, 2025, the Department acknowledged receipt of Attorney Zuares’ request. On March 19, 2025, the Department stated, “[p]lease be advised the Public Records Unit processes requests in the order they are received. Due to the high volume of requests we receive daily, we have not yet had a chance to process your request.” On June 25, 2025, the Department stated, “[p]lease be advised that the [Department] has implemented a new process for members of the public and members of the press requesting public records…Please note that any public record requests sent to this email address may not be received in a timely manner…” Current Appeal In his August 5, 2025 petition to this office, Attorney Zuares stated, “[a]fter receiving no further response from [the] Department, our office followed up on its request on March 19, 2025, and June 25, 2025, and was informed that the [Department] has not yet had a chance to process the request. No response has been received to date, and the online portal still reports the request as processing…” Timeliness in Providing Records G. L. c. 66, § 10(b) provides, in pertinent part, that if the magnitude or difficulty of the request unduly burdens the other responsibilities of the agency or municipality such that the agency or municipality cannot provide records within 10 business days, the agency or municipality must inform the requestor in writing within 10 business days. With respect to the timeframe to produce responsive records, the written response shall:

Allison Mondello SPR25/2280 Page 3 August 12, 2025 identify a reasonable timeframe in which the agency or municipality shall produce the public records sought; provided, that for an agency, the timeframe shall not exceed 15 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records and for a municipality the timeframe shall not exceed 25 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records; and provided further, that the requestor may voluntarily agree to a response date beyond the timeframes set forth herein. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Where Attorney Zuares resubmitted his request on February 10, 2025, and the Department has not provided the responsive records, nor cited an exemption for withholding records, I find the Department has not met its burden in responding to Attorney Zuares’ request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Consequently, I find the Department must provide an estimated date as to when it intends to complete its review and provide the responsive records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the Department must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Attorney Zuares with a response to the 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. Attorney Zuares 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: David J. Zuares, Esq.