Michael Fanale v. UMass Chan Medical School Police Department (SPR 20253003)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records October 24, 2025 SPR25/3003 Ryan Menard, Esq. Assistant Vice Chancellor for Management University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School Office of Management 55 Lake Avenue North Worcester, MA 01655 Dear Attorney Menard: I have received the petition of Michael A. Fanale appealing the response of the University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (University) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On August 16, 2025, Mr. Fanale requested the following: Requested Records (June 1, 2025 – present): 1. All reports, incident logs, case files, or internal communications referencing [four named individuals]. 2. Complete audio files of the two voicemails left by [a named individual] on June 19, 2025, and any related call notes, directives, or follow-up communications. 3. All internal communications, emails, or memos between UMass Police and Natick Police, Framingham Police, or any state agency regarding [a named individual] between June 1 and July 15, 2025. 4. Dispatch logs, CAD entries, or radio traffic involving [a named individual] or any response related to [another named individual] during this timeframe. 5. All body-worn camera (BWC) or cruiser dash camera footage, if available, involving any interactions with or discussions about [a named individual]. 6. Any documents or correspondence in which [a named individual]’s role as a witness in pending criminal charges against [another named individual] is discussed or documented. 7. All metadata for the above (timestamps, edit histories, officer badge numbers, etc.). The University responded on September 4, 2025. Unsatisfied with the University’s response, Mr. Fanale petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR25/3003, was opened as a result. 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

Ryan Menard, Esq. SPR25/3003 Page 2 October 24, 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. 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 University’s September 4th Response In its September 4, 2025 response, the University provides numerous responsive records, including “38 documents in total.” Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Fanale argues the following: The production omitted multiple categories of responsive materials that fall squarely within the scope of the Public Records Law, including: - Electronic communications between UMass Chan PD staff and outside agencies (notably Natick PD) conducted via personal or non-UMass devices; and - Internal emails and reports referenced within the production but withheld in full. Pending Litigation 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b) provides in pertinent part: the Supervisor may deny an appeal for, among other reasons if, in the opinion of the Supervisor: 1. the public records in question are the subjects of disputes in active litigation, administrative hearings or mediation.

Ryan Menard, Esq. SPR25/3003 Page 3 October 24, 2025 This office has reviewed the docket of the trial court and verified that the requested records are the subject of active and ongoing litigation in the Middlesex County Probate and Family Court. See Michael Fanale v. Merissa Fanale (Docket No. MI23D3271DR) (September 29, 2025). In light of the pending litigation, I decline to opine on this matter at this time. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b). Please note that a change in the status of this action could impact the applicability of 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Michael A. Fanale