David Webb v. Worcester, City of (SPR 20253017)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records October 28, 2025 SPR25/3017 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 August 6, 2025, Mr. Webb requested “[a]ll reports and BWC from officers involved in the standoff where a dog was sicced on a mentally ill man involved in the robbery of Santander 8-18-23 where ‘a team of city police officers surrounded a man who had taken refuge at the base of a smokestack behind the Denholm Building.’” Prior Appeal This request was the subject of a prior appeal. See SPR25/2581 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (September 3, 2025). In my September 3rd determination, I found that the City must provide Mr. Webb with a response to his request within ten business days. Subsequently, the City responded on October 14, 2025. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Mr. Webb petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3017, 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. 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 SPR25/3017 Page 2 October 28, 2025 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 October 14th Response On October 14, 2025, the City stated “[t]he City requires additional time, up to 15 business days as provided by statute, to complete the work associated with your request.” Current Appeal In his appeal, Mr. Webb states, “[the City] continues to unlawfully withhold these records, and I am again appealing to the state supervisor of records seeking enforcement of the public records law.” Timeliness in Providing Records 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 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 August 6, 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.

Michael Vigneux SPR25/3017 Page 3 October 28, 2025 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 E. Thompson, Esq.