Nathaniel Adams v. Boston, City of - Public Records (SPR 20253330)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records November 24, 2025 SPR25/3330 Grace Jung Director of Public Records City of Boston 1 City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201 Dear Ms. Jung: I have received the petition of Nathaniel Adams appealing the response of the City of Boston (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On September 18, 2025, Mr. Adams sought for the period of January 1, 2021 through August 22, 2025, “a spreadsheet (or CSV file) of Boston parking tickets issued by police officers, parking enforcement officers, or by other means. I would like to receive all relevant fields including: the name and/or id of the officer who issued the ticket; the offense for which the ticket was issued; where the ticket was issued (including both the street address/intersection AND the BTD patrol route along which the ticket was issued); vehicle description; the current adjudication status; and any other fields that can be provided. Additionally, please provide any documentation (preferably in map form, but if that’s not available, a written description) that indicates the geographic location of each BTD patrol route.” Previous Appeal The requested records were the subject of a prior appeal. See SPR25/3016 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (October 23, 2025). In my October 23rd determination, I ordered the City to clarify whether it possessed additional records responsive to Mr. Adams’ request. The City responded on November 10, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Adams petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3330, 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 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

Grace Jung SPR25/3330 Page 2 November 24, 2025 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. Att’y 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 November 10th Response In its November 10, 2025 response, the City stated, “[t]he city does not possess records linking citations to patrol routes in the format you requested. The documentation of parking tickets in the city’s possession has already been released in response in this request. Therefore, there are no additional responsive records for this portion of your request.” Current Appeal In his November 12, 2025 petition to this office, Mr. Adams stated the following: … When you compare the records provided by the City in 2020 against the records that were made available to me in September 2025 (a representative excerpt of which I provided in my original appeal), you will see that the two data sets contain all of the same information, in slightly different formats, except that the more recently provided dataset the City omitted the Traffic Route data from its spreadsheet, and now claims that such data is not available “in the format [I] requested.” I am highly confident that the City tracks Traffic Route data for every ticket issued – it remains a standard field that is completed on City of Boston traffic citations, and it makes sense that the city would require officers to input that information as way to monitor the geography of citations. I find it highly unlikely that the City does not maintain such Traffic Route data in a manner that makes it possible to associate the Traffic Route with a given citation – it would be odd for the City to keep all other traffic citation data in a single spreadsheet, and then segregate the Traffic Route data in a different file/format that is in no way linked to the rest of the citation data… …

Grace Jung SPR25/3330 Page 3 November 24, 2025 I note that the City has ignored the second element of my appeal. I had asked, in my original request, for them to provide documentation that explains the geography of each Traffic Route patrolled by the City’s Transportation Department…instead of just telling me that a given violation was cited in a given route number, I would also like some documentation that identifies the location/bounds of each Traffic Route within the city’s geography. Based on Mr. Adam’s petition, it is unclear whether the City possesses additional responsive records. 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). Consequently, the City must clarify whether it possesses additional responsive records. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Mr. Adams 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. Adams may appeal the substantive nature of the City’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Nathaniel Adams