Rory M. Coleman v. Boston, City of - Police Department (SPR 20253647)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records December 24, 2025 SPR25/3647 Christine O’Donnell, Esq. Records Access Officer Boston Police Department 1 City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney O’Donnell: I have received the petition of Rory M. Coleman appealing the response of the Boston Police Department (Department/BPD) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On November 15, 2025, Mr. Coleman requested: July 8, 2024 IAD Interview - Priority: [1] Audio/video recording of my interview with [two identified sergeants] (1530- 1700 hours)[;] [2] Specifically timestamp/segment at approximately 1630 hours when [an identified sergeant] asked: “How do we know you are gay”[;] [3] All notes, reports, documentation from this interview[;] [4] Any transcripts or summaries[;] [5] IAD Case 2022-0495 – Complete file including: [a] All reports, interviews, findings, dispositions[;] [b] City’s admission that factual basis was “incorrect” (MCAD Response ¶38)[;] [c] All involvement/documentation [from an identified sergeant][.] [6] IAD Case 2022-0505 – Complete file including[:] [a] All documents (noted “in Commissioner’s Office” as of July 8, 2024)[;] [b] All determinations and communications[.] 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

Christine O’Donnell, Esq. SPR25/3647 Page 2 December 24, 2025 [7] [An identified sergeant’s] files: [a] All complaints against her for discriminatory conduct[;] [b] All investigations she conducted involving LGBTQ+ officers[;] [c] Training records on EEO/discrimination[.] [8] All witness files: [a] All IAD records [from five identified individuals][.] Unredacted copies required - I am the complainant/subject with particularized legitimate interest requiring unredacted disclosure[.] The Department responded on November 15, 2025 and December 5, 2025, and assigned reference number B003319-111525 to this request. Unsatisfied with the Department’s responses, Mr. Coleman petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3647, 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 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. Status of the Requestor Please note that the reason for which a requestor seeks access to or a copy of a public record does not afford any greater right of access to the requested information than other persons in the general public. The Public Records Law does not distinguish between requestors. Access to a record pursuant to the Public Records Law rests on the content of the record and not the circumstances of the requestor. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); see also Bougas v. Chief of Police of Lexington, 371 Mass. 59, 64 (1976). Accordingly, Mr. Coleman’s purpose in making the request has no bearing on the public status of any existing responsive records.

Christine O’Donnell, Esq. SPR25/3647 Page 3 December 24, 2025 The Department’s November 15th and December 5th Responses On November 15, 2025, the Department acknowledged receipt of the request. On December 5, 2025, the Department stated, “[d]ue to the nature of your request additional time is needed. As such, BPD will need up to, but no more than, fifteen (15) additional business days to review and process your request.” Current Appeal In his current appeal, Mr. Coleman argues, “… BPD’s response was due December 2. BPD did not respond until December 5, 2025 - three business days late. No extension was requested or granted.” 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 Mr. Coleman submitted his request on November 15, 2025, and the Department has not provided responsive records, nor cited an exemption for withholding records, I find the Department has not met its burden in responding to the request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b). Consequently, the Department must provide an estimated date as to when it intends to complete the search and provide the responsive records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the Department must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. Coleman 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

Christine O’Donnell, Esq. SPR25/3647 Page 4 December 24, 2025 pre@sec.state.ma.us. Mr. Coleman 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: Rory M. Coleman