Allexis Sloan v. Quincy, City of - Police Department (SPR 20253076)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records November 4, 2025 SPR25/3076 Lieutenant David P. Pacino Records Access Officer Inspector of Divisions Quincy Police Department 1 Sea Street Quincy, MA 02169 Dear Lieutenant Pacino: I have received the petition of Allexis Sloan appealing the response of the Quincy Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On September 19, 2025, Ms. Sloan requested, for the time period of November 1, 2023 to May 1, 2025, incident reports for an identified street address involving three named individuals and “wellness checks, noise complaints, and any and everything else including my name.” Prior Appeal This request was the subject of a prior appeal. See SPR25/2926 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (October 20, 2025). In my October 20th determination, I found that the Department must clarify how Exemption (f) applies to the responsive records and whether the Department possesses additional records responsive to the request. The Department responded on October 20, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, Ms. Sloan petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3076, 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

Lieutenant David P. Pacino SPR25/3076 Page 2 November 4, 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. 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 October 20th Response In its October 20, 2025 response, the Department stated “... in response to the SPR25/2926 Petition Determination, please find the records related to QPD Incident #25013940. All identifiable and responsive records pertaining to your request have been provided.” Current Appeal In her appeal, Ms. Sloan states, “I would just like to know that not all reports have been given to me by the [Department]. They have conflicting reports as well as lot of things that don’t make sense as I was going through the reports, and these are just some very alarming things, especially because of the nature of these reports, and the things being said.” Subsequently, the Department contacted the Public Records Division via email on November 4, 2025, and confirmed that “[the Department] has provided all identifiable and responsive records related to the multiple requests.” No Duty to Create Records Under the Public Records Law, the Department is not required to create a record in response to a public records request. See G. L. c. 66, § 6A(d); 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). 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). Conclusion Accordingly, where the Department has confirmed that it does not possess additional records, and has no duty to create records responsive to the request, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. Ms. Sloan is advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A(c).

Lieutenant David P. Pacino SPR25/3076 Page 3 November 4, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Allexis Sloan