Karen Anzalone v. Winchester, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20253596)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records December 19, 2025 SPR25/3596 Jennifer Rolli Records Access Officer Winchester Police Department 30 Mount Vernon Street Winchester, MA 01890 Dear Ms. Rolli: I have received the petition of Karen Anzalone appealing the response of the Winchester 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 November 5, 2025, Ms. Anzalone requested: All Q Sheets and Officers Formal Reports involving [two identified individuals]. Also, please include the q sheets and officers formal reports involving any interactions between [three identified addresses]. Lastly, please include any reports involving [two identified individuals], [three identified addresses] and The Winchester Housing Authority. Please include any reports that fall under these qualifications from March 1 2021 through March 1, 2025. Ms. Anzalone modified her request on November 12, 2025 to include: [1] A copy of the required, written request for police reports submitted by [an identified individual] from 2022 – 2025 specifically requesting reports regarding [two identified individuals], [an identified address] or any other events including the above named individuals or address. [2] All correspondence, notes, call logs or inquiries made by [an identified individual] in reference to any incidents between [two identified individuals], [an identified address] and the Winchester Police Department. Ms. Anzalone further modified her request on November 20, 2025 to include: 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

Jennifer Rolli SPR25/3596 Page 2 December 19, 2025 [1] A copy of the required request for police reports submitted by [an identified individual] from 2022 - 2025 specifically requesting reports regarding [two identified individuals], [an identified address] or any other events including the above named individuals or address[;] [2] [A]ny consent I signed in order to provide [an identified individual] with this information. Most specifically, report 403538[;] [3] [Y]our fax number…[;] [4] A copy of the surveillance video provided by [an identified individual] in report 406297…[;] [5] From report 40695, please provide a report of the post that was placed on the Winchester home page by [an identified individual]…[;] [6] From I number 410655, a copy of the footage provided by [an identified individual] from her personal archives on 1-11-25[;] [7] Report 406485 from July 27, 2025. Please send the original, or if the original which I have in my possession has changed, please inform me as to why as the report on the copy you just sent me is completely false[;] [8] Report 404889 from 8/20/24 - please provide the footage of a man placing a ‘box’ in our white rental car…[;] [9] From report 406789 on 10/25/25, please provide a copy of the footage supplied by [an identified individual]…[;] [10] On report 401252 from 5/20/24 a copy of the footage provided by [an identified individual]…[;] [11] Report 410463 from 1/7/25. Please send confirmation of the information provided to the officer as he was told by [an identified individual]…[;] [12] [A]ny other records that were changed and / or had an addendum added during the time prior to 7/2024. The Department responded on November 13, 2025 and November 20, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Department responses, Ms. Anzalone petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3596, was opened as a result.

Jennifer Rolli SPR25/3596 Page 3 December 19, 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 Department’s November 13th and November 20th Responses On November 13, 2025, the Department stated: You requested all reports involving you in May of 2024 and those reports were provided to you. I am in the process of pulling reports from May of 2024 to current. Once I have those reports I will let you know, it should be within the next week or two. On November 20, 2025, the Department provided police reports from May 2024 to November 2025. Current Appeal In her current appeal, Ms. Anzalone argues: …when I spoke to [the Department] before filing a Public Records Request, I detailed what I was looking for. [The Department] responded by stating she had already provided several reports to me previously and therefore, she was not required to provide the reports to me again. I told [the Department] … I was seeking all of the reports containing information on me, not just select reports as I had in the past. Additionally, I recently received copies of police reports from other agencies that were different from the copies I was provided, numerous reports had addendums added that I had no record of, and several reports were

Jennifer Rolli SPR25/3596 Page 4 December 19, 2025 completely different from either what I reported, or from the information I was previously provided. Records in Existence; No Duty to Answer Questions, Conduct Research, Create Documents 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). Under the Public Records Law, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). In accordance with the Public Records Law, custodians are expected to use their superior knowledge of the records in their custody to assist requestors in obtaining the desired information. See 950 C.M.R. 32.04(5). In this case, based on the Department’s responses and the information provided in Ms. Anzalone’s appeal petition, it is unclear whether the Department possesses additional records responsive to the request. If the Department does possess additional responsive records, it must either provide the records, or cite an exemption to the Public Records Law, and explain with specificity how such an exemption applies to withhold or redact the records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv) (a written response must “identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based”). Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Ms. Anzalone 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. Ms. Anzalone may further appeal the substantive nature of the Department’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Karen Anzalone