Colin Bell v. Department of Conservation and Recreation (SPR 20252483)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records September 5, 2025 SPR25/2483 Michael Tencellent Paralegal Department of Conservation and Recreation State Transportation Building 10 Park Plaza, Suite 6620 Boston, MA 02144 Dear Mr. Tencellent: I have received the petition of Colin Bell appealing the response of the Department of Conservation and Recreation (Department) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On August 3, 2025, Mr. Bell requested: [R]ecords related to an incident that occurred near the Charles River Locks on July 18, 2025. At approximately 1:50 PM, a citation was issued by the Massachusetts State Police Marine Unit to the operator of an 18-foot Boston Whaler for an alleged wake violation in close proximity to the marina and lock system. Specifically, I request the following records: [1] Any and all video footage from DCR-operated security cameras at or near the Charles River Locks recorded between 1:40 PM and 2:00 PM on July 18, 2025, showing vessel activity or the incident in question. [2] Any communications (including but not limited to radio transmissions, emails, phone logs, or text messages) made by the lock operator or any DCR staff regarding this vessel or the incident between 1:30 PM and 3:00 PM on July 18, 2025. This includes communications with: - The Massachusetts State Police or their Marine Unit, - Any other law enforcement, agency, marina personnel, or third party expressing concern about the vessel’s behavior, - Any observers, witnesses, or external entities reporting or responding to the incident. The Department responded on August 18, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Bell 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

Michael Tencellent SPR25/2483 Page 2 September 5, 2025 petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2483, was opened as a result. Subsequently, the Department provided a supplemental response on August 25, 2025. 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. 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 August 18th response In its August 18, 2025 response, the Department provided a link to responsive documents. Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Bell states: DCR provided: 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—despite the specificity of my request…. DCR provided an incomplete and noncompliant response lacking key requested elements and indicating an insufficient search or unjustified withholding. No Duty to Create Records Please note that 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

Michael Tencellent SPR25/2483 Page 3 September 5, 2025 request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(ii). Further, under the Public Records Law, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). However, in accordance with the Public Records Law, 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). In an email to this office on August 25, 2025, the Department asserted, “[t]he August 3 request has been responded to and has no additional documents.” Conclusion Where the Department confirmed that it does not possess additional records responsive to Mr. Bell’s request, and has no duty to create records responsive to the request, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. If Mr. Bell is not satisfied with the resolution of this administrative appeal, please be advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(b)(ix), 10A(c) (pursuing administrative appeal does not limit availability of judicial remedies). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Colin Bell