Jonathan Gerhardson v. Springfield, City of (SPR 20253659)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records December 18, 2025 SPR25/3659 Justin P. Morin Public Records Coordinator City of Springfield 36 Court Street, Room 405 Springfield, MA 01103 Dear Mr. Morin: On December 11, 2025, this office received your petition on behalf of the City of Springfield (City) seeking an extension of time to produce records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). As required by law, it is my understanding that the City furnished a copy of the petition to the requestor, Jonathon Gerhardson. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On November 12, 2025, Mr. Gerhardson requested the following: [1] Any and all Memoranda of Understanding, Memoranda of Agreement, or other interagency agreements between this department and any federal agency (including, but not limited to, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) concerning participation in any federal law enforcement task force (including, but not limited to, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF), in effect from January 1, 2015, to the date this request is processed[;] [2] Any and all current departmental policies, procedures, general orders, or written directives governing the assignment of personnel to federal law enforcement task forces, including but not limited to the JTTF[;] [3] A list of the ranks and start/end dates for all personnel assigned to any federal law enforcement task force (including, but not limited to, the JTTF) from January 1, 2020, to the date this request is processed[;] [4] Copies of all records of requests for overtime reimbursement submitted to any federal agency for personnel assigned to any federal law enforcement task force (including, but not limited to, the JTTF), from January 1, 2020, to the date this request is processed[;] 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

Justin P. Morin SPR25/3659 Page 2 December 18, 2025 [5] Copies of all records, including travel vouchers and training certifications, for any specialized counter-terrorism, intelligence, or surveillance training received by personnel during their assignment to any federal law enforcement task force (including, but not limited to, the JTTF), from January 1, 2020, to the date this request is processed[;] [6] Copies of all reports, summaries, or presentations provided by personnel assigned to any federal law enforcement task force (including, but not limited to, the JTTF) to the Chief of Police, Superintendent, or other command staff regarding task force activities, from January 1, 2023, to the date this request is processed[;] [7] All records of civil rights complaints or internal affairs investigations initiated against personnel during their assignment to any federal law enforcement task force (including, but not limited to, the JTTF)[;] [8] All records, including policies, procedures, purchase orders, and usage logs, related to the use of cellsite simulators (often referred to as ‘Stingrays’ or ‘IMSI catchers’) and other technology by department personnel assigned to any federal law enforcement task force (including, but not limited to, the JTTF)[.] It is my understanding that this petition concerns Items 1 and 4 of Mr. Gerhardson’s request. Petition for an Extension of Time Under the Public Records Law, upon a showing of good cause, the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) may grant a single extension to an agency not to exceed 20 business days and a single extension to a municipality not to exceed 30 business days. In determining whether there has been a showing of good cause, the Supervisor shall consider, but shall not be limited to considering: (i) the need to search for, collect, segregate or examine records; (ii) the scope of redaction required to prevent unlawful disclosure; (iii) the capacity or the normal business hours of operation of the agency or municipality to produce the request without the extension; (iv) efforts undertaken by the agency or municipality in fulfilling the current request and previous requests; (v) whether the request, either individually or as part of a series of requests from the same requestor, is frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality; and (vi) the public interest served by expeditious disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c).

Justin P. Morin SPR25/3659 Page 3 December 18, 2025 If the Supervisor determines that the request is part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass, and the requests are not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, the Supervisor may grant a longer extension or relieve the agency or municipality of its obligation to provide copies of the records sought. Id. The filing of a petition does not affect the requirement that a Records Access Officer (RAO) must provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 36.06(4)(b). Current Petition In its petition, the City requests an extension of 10 business days to provide records responsive to Item 1, and an extension of one year to produce records responsive to Item 4. In support of its petition, the City provides the following information: The [City] has been advised by personnel at the Police Department that in order to respond to Mr. Gerhardson’ s request for copies of “records of requests for overtime reimbursement submitted to any federal agency for personnel assigned to any federal law enforcement task force (including, but not limited to, the JTTF), from January 1, 2020, to the date this request is processed”, approximately 5 years of overtime slips for over 400 peace officers will need to be conducted as an individual with the appropriate security clearance must conduct a hand search of the records and make copies. The difficulty of responding to this portion of the request has been compared to “near impossible” by an Official at the Police Department. This portion of the request is expected to require over 365 days to conduct due to the high number of records (30,000 estimated) that will need to be searched individually by hand to compile overtime slips for 400 officers for five calendar years. Furthermore, the same information that would be provided to the requester is available in the spreadsheet forms released to them on 12/11/2025 (See Exhibits B, C, D, E, F, and G). The City respectfully requests that (1) the Supervisor of Records grant the City a ten-business day time extension to allow the City to respond to a portion of their request for task force memorandums no later than 12/26/2025. Additionally, the (2) City also respectfully requests that if the requester seeks copies of the paper slips, the Supervisor of Records grants a significant extension of time near 365 days on or before 12/11/2026, as responding within 30 days would be prejudicial to the Official’s ability to perform their core job function due to the format of the records requiring a time consuming hand search, existence of the same information on a spreadsheet released to the requester, and the number of records that would need to be reviewed to sort and compile the responsive overtime slips for 5 years of 400 officers contained within nearly 30,000 other paper records.

Justin P. Morin SPR25/3659 Page 4 December 18, 2025 I find that in light of the need to search for, collect, segregate and examine the records, the capacity of the City to produce the request without the extension, and the efforts undertaken by the City in fulfilling the current request, the City has established good cause to permit an extension of time. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c)(i)-(iv). The City is granted an extension of 30 business days. Appropriate Definitions, Parameters, and Time Frames In Friedman v. Div. of Admin. Law Appeal and Bureau of Special Educ. Appeals, the Suffolk Superior Court, in its Memorandum of Decision and Order on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, stated: [The requester] has a right to seek public records from his government, provided he does so in a reasonable manner. [The agencies], in turn, have a right not to be inundated with drain-the-ocean records requests, provided they fulfill the basic expectations of the [Public Records Law] in a fair and transparent manner. See Friedman v. Div of Admin. Law Appeal and Bureau of Special Educ. Appeals, Suffolk Sup. No. 2284CV02061-C, at 3 (February 14, 2023). The Court in Friedman noted, “the extraordinary volume of records called for in this case has compelled the Defendants to produce responsive materials in a ‘rolling’ fashion, rather than in accordance with deadlines contemplated by the [Public Records Law].” Id. at 1. The Court stated that: [T]he parties shall be expected to agree upon, to the greatest extent possible, the following: (a) appropriate definitions, time frames, and parameters regarding substance and scope for the identification of requested documents; (b) appropriate search terms to be used for the retrieval of responsive documents; (c) a reasonable time frame for the production of requested documents, if the statute’s presumptive deadlines are not realistic; (d) appropriate rules to govern the withholding of documents falling within the scope of a statutory privilege or privacy doctrine; and (e) an appropriate methodology for computing the reasonable fees that may be charged for responsive document production. Id. at 2. This office encourages Mr. Gehardson and the City to communicate directly in order to facilitate providing records more efficiently and affordably. Mr. Gehardson may consider narrowing the scope of his request to enable the City to provide the records more efficiently and affordably. The City must use its superior knowledge of the records to suggest any potential reasonable modifications to the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vii) (a municipality shall suggest a reasonable modification of the scope of the request or offer to assist the requestor to modify the

Justin P. Morin SPR25/3659 Page 5 December 18, 2025 scope of the request if doing so would enable the municipality to produce the records sought more efficiently and affordably). Conclusion As described above, I find that the City has established good cause for a time extension of 30 business days. To the extent possible, the City must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Please note, Mr. Gerhardson has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the appropriate superior court. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(c), 10(d)(iv)(4), 10A(c). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Jonathon Gerhardson