Maryna Pashchenko v. Revere, City of - Police Department (SPR 20253115)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records November 4, 2025 SPR25/3115 Captain Thomas J. Malone Records Access Officer Revere Police Department 400 Revere Beach Parkway Revere, MA 02151 Dear Captain Malone: I have received the petition of Maryna Pashchenko appealing the response of the Revere 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 14, 2025, Ms. Pashchenko requested the following: [1] A copy of the original audio recording of [an identified] 911 call made on August 18, 2025 (The audio file itself , not a transcript)[;] . . . [2] A written status update and a copy of the record of [an identified] citizen complaint filed under log entry 25-52401. The Department responded on October 14, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, Ms. Pashchenko petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3115, 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 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

Captain Thomas J. Malone SPR25/3115 Page 2 November 4, 2025 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 14th Response In its October 14, 2025 response, the Department indicated that the records responsive to Item 1 of Ms. Pashchenko’s request “are NOT in the Department’s possession, custody or control” and advised, “[t]he Metro North Regional Emergency Communication Center (MNRECC) is the Keeper of- Records for all 9-1-1 audio calls and dispatcher/call-taker recordings for the Revere Police Department.” The Department additionally provided the MNRECC’s address and phone number, as well as instructions for how to submit an online request for records through the MNRECC’s website. Regarding Item 2 of Ms. Pashchenko’s request, the Department provided two responsive records, “Log entry: 25-52401” and “Citizen Complaint - Completed Internal Affairs Investigation report[,]” with redactions and cited Exemption (c) of the Public Records Law in support of its position. Specifically, the Department stated, “[t]he Department has redacted the personal information (date of births, social security numbers, driver’s license numbers, medical records, home address and biographical data). No other information has been redacted.” Current Appeal In her October 24, 2025 appeal petition, Ms. Pashchenko states that she submits her appeal based on “the handling of [her] records requests by the Revere Police Department.” Specifically, Ms. Pashchenko argues that the Department “[misrepresented] possession of the 911 call recording” responsive to Item 1 of her request. She additionally requests that this office “[r]equire the Revere Police Department to produce the full, unaltered 911 recording directly from MNRECC” and further seeks an, “explanation of why the Revere Police denied possession of the 911 call on October 14, 2025. . . .” Upon review of the file, it appears Ms. Pashchenko is not objecting to the Department’s claims under Exemption (c) concerning Item 2 of the request. Issue Addressed in Separate Appeal It is my understanding that the subject matter of this request and the issues raised in Ms. Pashchenko’s appeal are similar to those addressed in SPR25/3072 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (November 3, 2025). In my November 3rd determination, regarding Item 1 of the September 14, 2025 request, I found that it was unclear whether there is an agency relationship between the Department and the MNRECC. Consequently, I ordered the Department to provide additional information regarding the relationship between it and the MNRECC, as well as the scope of any such relationship in order to determine whether the Department has met its burden under G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(ii) to provide records that are in the possession, custody, or

Captain Thomas J. Malone SPR25/3115 Page 3 November 4, 2025 control of the custodian of records at the time of the request. Conclusion Where I have previously addressed the claims raised in this appeal, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Maryna Pashchenko