Trant, Paul v. Massachusetts State Lottery Commission (SPR 20260083)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records January 23, 2026 SPR26/0083 Gregory M. Polin, Esq. General Counsel State Lottery Commission 150 Mount Vernon Street Dorchester, MA 02125 Dear Attorney Polin: I have received the petition of Paul Trant appealing the response of the State Lottery Commission (Commission) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On December 11, 2025, Mr. Trant requested “the game #444 book settlement history of every lottery agent that was issued game #444 Bonus 50X instant scratch tickets.” The Commission responded on January 8, 2026. Unsatisfied with the Commission’s response, Mr. Trant petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR26/0083, was opened as a result. Subsequent to the opening of this appeal, the Commission provided a further response to Mr. Trant and this office on January 21, 2026. 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. 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

Gregory M. Polin, Esq. SPR26/0083 Page 2 January 23, 2026 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. Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Trant argues the following: The MA Lottery has previously provided me with the book settlement history of a lottery agent on April 7, 2025. The lottery does in fact possess my requested information and providing me this information prior, did not have any adverse impact on the normal operations of the lottery. The Commission’s January 8th and January 21st Responses In its January 8, 2026 response, the Commission states the following: Please be advised that we do not have a report responsive to this request. To the extent the Lottery did have this requested report for all Lottery agents, book settlement history of every Lottery agent would be exempt from disclosure pursuant to exemption (b) (internal personnel rules and practices). This type of data is predominantly used internally by the Lottery and proper performance of necessary government functions will be inhibited by disclosure. In its January 21, 2026 response, the Commission further explains the following: The Lottery has provided Mr. Trant with the game #444 book settlement history for a single Lottery Sales Agent, however, the equivalent information for all of the Lottery’s roughly 7,000 Sales Agents would be a vast amount of internal Lottery data and such record is exempt from disclosure pursuant to exemption (b) (internal personnel rules and practices) and exemption (f) (investigatory). Exemption (b) Exemption (b) permits the withholding of records that are: Related solely to internal personnel rules and practices of the government unit, provided however, that such records shall be withheld only to the extent that proper performance of necessary governmental functions requires such withholding G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(b). There are no authoritative Massachusetts decisions interpreting Exemption (b). The general purpose of the cognate federal exemption is to relieve agencies of the burden of

Gregory M. Polin, Esq. SPR26/0083 Page 3 January 23, 2026 assembling and maintaining for public inspection materials in which the public cannot reasonably be expected to have an interest. See Dep’t of the Air Force v. Rose, 425 U.S. 352, 362-70 (1976) (interpreting the federal Freedom of Information Act, which provides an exemption for records which are “related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency”); see also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Boston Ret. Bd., 388 Mass. 427, 432 (1983) (Massachusetts Public Records Law modeled on federal Freedom of Information Act). The courts have interpreted the federal exemption to allow withholding of materials that, if released, could cause agency rules or regulations to be circumvented. See Fiumara v. Higgins, 572 F. Supp. 1093, 1102 (1983) (internal codes are exempt where disclosure may enable outsiders to circumvent agency functions). The analysis employed by the federal courts requires a two-pronged test. Material is exempt if it is predominantly used internally and if disclosed would significantly risk circumvention of agency regulations and statutes. See Marrera v. United States Dep’t of Justice, 622 F. Supp. 51, 55 (D.D.C. 1985) (Bureau of Prisons access and identity codes were properly withheld as materials in which the public would have no legitimate interest or which would compromise security if disclosed). In its January 21st response, under Exemption (b), the Commission argues the following: The Lottery’s website provides customers with information regarding game #444, which includes the game’s prize structure and the number of tickets the prize structure is based on, as well as the current number of prizes claimed and unclaimed for each prize amount. Book settlement data is used internally by the Lottery, and the compilation and release of the requested information will inhibit the performance of necessary government functions. The Lottery uses book settlement data to, among other things, track the game’s sale and inventory control at Lottery Sales Agent locations throughout the Commonwealth and facilitate appropriate accounting for the Lottery’s approximately 7,000 Sales Agents. Game #444 (Bonus 50X) has three (3) $1,000,000 grand prize-winning tickets. As of January 20, 2026, one of the grand prize-winning Bonus 50X tickets has been claimed and the other two (2) remain unclaimed. In 2025, Mr. Trant submitted 19 public records requests for information relating to the Bonus 50X game. Requesters such as Mr. Trant may put forth public records requests such as this that seek vast amounts of data that identifies the date, frequency, and/or total amount of book settlements for each of the Lottery’s approximately 7,000 Sales Agents in an attempt to gain what they may perceive as an advantage to locating grand prize-winning tickets that have not yet been sold. It is the mission of the Lottery to operate in a manner that secures the integrity of its games and releasing information in a public records request that could lead to the mistaken perception that not all Lottery players are on equal footing with respect to prize odds would undermine the integrity of the Lottery’s games and operations. Accordingly, be advised that the requested record is exempt from disclosure

Gregory M. Polin, Esq. SPR26/0083 Page 4 January 23, 2026 pursuant to exemption (b) (internal personnel rules and practices). Based on the information provided in the Commission’s January 21st response, I find that the Commission has met its burden to show how disclosing the book settlement data would reveal “internal personnel rules and practices,” and “would significantly risk circumvention of agency regulations” concerning the ability to operate in a manner that secures the integrity of the Commission’s games. Consequently, I find the Commission has met its burden to withhold the responsive data under Exemption (b). Exemption (f) Exemption (f) permits the withholding of: investigatory materials necessarily compiled out of the public view by law enforcement or other investigatory officials the disclosure of which materials would probably so prejudice the possibility of effective law enforcement that such disclosure would not be in the public interest G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(f). A custodian of records generally must demonstrate a prejudice to investigative efforts in order to withhold requested records. Information relating to an ongoing investigation may be withheld if disclosure could alert suspects to the activities of investigative officials. Confidential investigative techniques may also be withheld indefinitely if disclosure is deemed to be prejudicial to future law enforcement activities. Bougas v. Chief of Police of Lexington, 371 Mass. 59, 62 (1976). Redactions may be appropriate where they serve to preserve the anonymity of voluntary witnesses. Antell v. Att’y Gen., 52 Mass. App. Ct. 244, 248 (2001); Reinstein v. Police Comm’r of Boston, 378 Mass. 281, 290 n.18 (1979). Exemption (f) invites a “case-by- case consideration” of whether disclosure “would probably so prejudice the possibility of effective law enforcement that such disclosure would not be in the public interest.” See Reinstein, 378 Mass. at 289-90. In its January 21st response, under Exemption (f), the Commission argues the following: Pursuant to G.L. c. 10, § 24(a), the Lottery shall determine, among other things, the manner of payment of prizes to the holders of winning tickets and 961 CMR 2.39 provides that if “there is an inconsistency in the information submitted in a Mobile Claim Process, on a claim form and/or as shown on the winning ticket, the Director shall make an investigation and withhold all winnings awarded to the ticket owner until such time as he or she is satisfied that the winnings are paid to the proper person.” Further, 961 CMR 2.45 provides that if “a dispute arises with respect to the winning ticket, a claim for, a Mobile Claim, the Mobile Claim Process, the payment, or the awarding of any prize, the Commission may withhold payment of the prize winnings until it determines the controversy and reaches a decision….” The Lottery’s Compliance personnel may utilize book

Gregory M. Polin, Esq. SPR26/0083 Page 5 January 23, 2026 settlement data when reviewing and substantiating prize claims. The public release of the book settlement data for all of the Lottery’s approximately 7,000 Sales Agents could prejudice the Lottery’s investigative efforts when reviewing prize claims, and furthermore the public release of this data could be used by individuals to help facilitate their submission of false or fraudulent claims and result in unwarranted prize claim disputes. Accordingly, be advised that the requested record is exempt from disclosure pursuant to exemption (f) (investigatory). In this case, where the Commission has met its burden to withhold the responsive data pursuant to Exemption (b) of the Public Records Law, I find it is unnecessary to address the Commission’s claims under Exemption (f). Conclusion Accordingly, I will consider this administrative appeal closed. If Mr. Trant is not satisfied with the resolution of this administrative appeal, please be advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(b)(ix), 10A(c) (pursuing administrative appeal does not limit availability of judicial remedies). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Paul Trant