David Webb v. Worcester, City of - Law Department (SPR 20252759)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records October 1, 2025 SPR25/2759 Michael Vigneux Records Access Officer City of Worcester 455 Main Street Worcester, MA 01609 Dear Mr. Vigneux: I have received the petition of David Webb appealing the response of the City of Worcester (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On July 31, 2025, Mr. Webb requested: [1] 6/21/2025 00:31 (12:31AM) [an identified individual and address] report and bodyworn footage[;] [2] April 26th - 1 almont Bodyworn from both officers, all written reports[;] [3] April 26th - Dispatch Phone call to 1 Almont ave[;] [4] July 27th - Dispatch call of a Person on their way to church to have a small homeless encampment removed[;] [5] The full BWC of officers present at the church incident where officers used unnecessary force on a pastor and his son at Cornerstone Bible Baptist Church in October of 2019 as described in the DOJ report[;] [6] The full BWC footage of the officer who wrongfully used a taser on [an identified individual] in October 2023[;] [7] The cell phone video that was seized by worcester officers in the complaint found below in the link. Also provide me with all videos and police report associated with this particular incident including the wagon footage and all videos collected during this investigation … [8] Please provide me with the cell phone video and police report of the incident where a man had his leg mauled by worcester pd dogs in the complaint found below in the link. Also provide me with all videos and police report associated with this particular incident including the times officers lied that they saw the man punch officers … [9] All record of the BOPS investigation into officer Tolson regarding the incident where he threatened to have someone arrested for recording on the sidewalk[.] 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 Vigneux SPR25/2759 Page 2 October 1, 2025 To provide additional context for Items 7 and 8 of his request, Mr. Webb provided links to several online articles. The City responded on August 20 and September 3, 2025. Unsatisfied with the City’s responses, Mr. Webb petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2759, 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. 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 City’s August 20th and September 3rd Responses In its August 20, 2025 response, the City informed Mr. Webb that it would require up to 15 additional business days to provide records responsive to his requests, assigned reference number W074948-080525. In its September 3, 2025 response, the City produced records responsive to Items 1, 2, 5, 6, and 9 of the request. The City sought further clarification with regard to Items 3, 4, 7, and 8 of the request. On September 3, 2025, Mr. Webb provided additional information regarding the records sought by Items 3, 7, and 8 of the request. Current Appeal In his September 19, 2025 petition to this office, Mr. Webb contended that the City was improperly withholding records responsive to Items 3, 7, and 8 of the request.

Michael Vigneux SPR25/2759 Page 3 October 1, 2025 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: 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 the request was originally submitted on July 31, 2025, Mr. Webb provided additional clarification of his request on September 3, 2025, and the City has not provided responsive records, I find the City has not met its burden in responding to the request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Accordingly, I find the City must provide an estimated date as to when it expects to complete its review and provide the requested records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the City must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Mr. Webb with a response to the request, in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within 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. Webb may appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: David Webb Janice Thompson, Esq.