Colman Herman v. Middlesex County Sheriff's Office (SPR 20252843)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records October 9, 2025 SPR25/2843 Megan J. McLatchey, Esq. Associate Legal Counsel Middlesex County Sheriff’s Office 12 Gill Street, Suite 4700 Woburn, MA 01801 Dear Attorney McLatchey: I have received the petition of Colman Herman appealing the response of the Middlesex County Sheriff’s Office (Office) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On September 11, 2025, Mr. Herman requested the following: [1] Records of any and all expense that [an identified individual] has incurred in his capacity as sheriff of Middlesex County for the period of September 1, 2024 to August 31, 2025[;] [a] Expense reports, including back-up receipts[;] [b] Credit cards statements, including back-up receipts[;] [c] Automobile expense records, including back-up receipts[;] [d] Any and all other records that document [an identified individual’s] expenses, including back-up receipts[;] [2] The written employee reimbursement policy of the Middlesex County sheriff’s office. The Office responded on September 25, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Herman petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2843, 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

Megan J. McLatchey, Esq. SPR25/2843 Page 2 October 9, 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 Office’s September 25th Response In its September 25, 2025 response, the Office provided a record responsive to Item 2, stated that it has no records responsive to Items 1(a), 1(b), and 1(d), and provided records responsive to Item 1(c) with redactions pursuant to Exemption (c) and Exemption (n) of the Public Records Law. See G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c), (n). Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Herman stated, “[o]n September 25, 2025, [the Office] produced some responsive records, but they deal solely with gasoline expenses. [An identified individual] is very active nationally and locally. And on information and belief he has been reimbursed for meals and lodging as part of his attending professional meetings, conferences, and the like… Accordingly, please order the Middlesex County Sheriff’s office to produce all the responsive records.” Upon review, it appears that Mr. Herman does not contest the Office’s redactions under Exemption (c) and Exemption (n) of Public Records Law to records responsive to Item 1(c) of his request. Records in Existence Please be advised 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 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). Based on the information provided in Mr. Herman’s petition, and the Office’s September 25th response, it is unclear whether the Office possesses additional records responsive to Items 1(a), 1(b), or 1(d). If the Office does possess additional responsive records, it must either provide

Megan J. McLatchey, Esq. SPR25/2843 Page 3 October 9, 2025 the records, or cite an exemption to the Public Records Law, and explain with specificity how such an exemption applies to withhold or redact the records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv) (a written response must “identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based”). Conclusion Accordingly, the Office is ordered to provide Mr. Herman 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. Mr. Herman may appeal the substantive nature of the Office’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Colman Herman