Colin Bell v. Massachusetts State Police (SPR 20252481)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records September 5, 2025 SPR25/2481 Allison Mondello Public Records Manager Massachusetts Department of State Police 470 Worcester Road Framingham, MA 01702 Dear Ms. Mondello: I have received the petition of Colin Bell 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 July 18, 2025, Mr. Bell requested the following: [1] Body-worn or vessel-mounted camera footage from the July 18, 2025 incident involving the MSP Marine Unit and my vessel[;] [2] A copy of the citation issued and any associated reports or enforcement logs[;] [3] Any radio, dispatch, or other communication records relevant to the incident[;] [4] Personnel files for the involved MSP officers, including: [a] Pay records and pay stubs[;] [b] Any public complaints or disciplinary action[;] [c] Employment history and rank. On August 3, 2025, Mr. Bell modified his request to include the following records: [1] All security camera footage showing the vessel entering and exiting the Charles River Locks on July 18, 2025. [2] Any internal communication—radio, text, email, phone—by or to the lock operator regarding this vessel or incident. [3] The name of the lock operator ... and any personnel records, including: [a] Prior complaints, [b] Disciplinary actions, [c] Employment history, [d] Salary or pay stub data. [e] Any complaints made by the public regarding lock staff in the past 12 months. 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 SPR25/2481 Page 2 September 5, 2025 The Department responded to Mr. Bell’s request on August 4, 2025 and August 19, 2025. Subsequently, the Department sent a further response on August 25, 2025. Unsatisfied with the responses, Mr. Bell petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR25/2481, 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. Att’y 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 August 4th, August 19th and August 25th responses In its August 4, 2025 response, the Department stated that “[w]e are actively working on your request. We have thus far identified several records, and will continue to conduct a diligent search for all responsive records, which will be reviewed for necessary redactions under the Massachusetts Public Records Law (M.G.L. c. 66, §10). We expect to have a more substantive response for you in the next week, at which time the requested records will be made available to you.” In its August 19, 2025 response, the Department stated, “[t]he Department has located record(s) that are potentially responsive to your request. Portions of the responsive records include information not subject to public disclosure pursuant to [M.G.L. c. 4, §7, cl. 26 (a), M.G.L. c. 4, §7, cl. 26 (c), M.G.L. c. 4, §7, cl. 26 (f)]; however, if the Department confirms your identity as an involved party, we may provide the records to you. Please verify your identity by uploading a photo/scan of your driver’s license to this request. Please note records may still be provided to you without TD verification but may result in additional redactions.” In its August 25, 2025 response, the Department stated, “[w]ith the information provided in the request, the Department conducted a diligent search and was able to locate the following responsive record which has been made available to you in My Records Center: Service Call; 25-306714[,] Citation; AA20429[,] Radio Recording(s)[.]” The Department citied Exemption (f)

Allison Mondello SPR25/2481 Page 3 September 5, 2025 of the Public Records Law in support of the redactions to the responsive records. The Department further stated, “... the Department conducted a diligent search and was able to locate the following responsive videos: [identified] Trooper BWL7-010615 | 1 Video[;] [identified] Trooper BWL7-023161| 1 Video. After review, the Massachusetts State Police has determined that, in part, the content of the record sought is exempt from public disclosure pursuant to M.G.L. c. 4, § 7(26). Please see redaction index appended to the responsive record you are being provided.” Current Appeal In his August 20, 2025 appeal, Mr. Bell states that he received, “[a] single inbound video (showing only the vessel’s entry), One internal email narrative, No documentation of the vessel’s exit, which was acknowledged in that same email, No personnel records, employee identification, or complaint documentation ...” In his August 25, 2025 email Mr. Bell further advised, “...this response remains incomplete based on the scope of my original and supplemental requests.” Based upon his appeal, Mr. Bell appears to not be contesting the Exemption (f) claims made by the Department to withhold and redact portions of the responsive records. Based on Mr. Bell’s claims, in conjunction with the Department’s responses, it is unclear if the Department possesses any additional records responsive to his request. The duty to comply with requests for records extends to those records that exist and are in the possession, custody, or control of the custodian of records at the time of the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(ii). However, custodians are expected to use their superior knowledge of the records in their custody to assist requestors in obtaining the desired information. See 950 C.M.R. 32.04(5). Consequently, the Department must clarify whether any additional responsive records exist. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. Bell with a response to his 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. Mr. Bell 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: Colin Bell