McGowan, Scott v. Otis, City of - Police Department (SPR 20260298)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records February 9, 2026 SPR26/0298 Kristopher G. McDonough Chief of Police Otis Police Department 1 North Main Road Otis, MA 01253 Dear Chief McDonough: I have received the petition of Scott McGowan appealing the response of the Otis 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 January 13, 2026, Mr. McGowan requested, [a]ny and all records. . .that are in the possession of the Town of Otis and the Otis Police Department (OPD), regarding the OPD assignment(s) and participation in the law enforcement escort of [an identified Hinsdale Police Sergeant], on or about January 10, 2026. These records include, but are not limited to, letters, memoranda, electronic mail, notes, text messages, payroll records, and telephone records. The Department provided responses on January 13, January 21, and January 28, 2026. Unsatisfied with the responses, Mr. McGowan petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/0298, 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. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also 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

Chief Kristopher G. McDonough SPR26/0298 Page 2 February 9, 2026 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. See 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 Departments Responses In its January 13, 2026 response, a Town representative stated, “I am not the public records access officer. I have forwarded this email on to [an identified individual] who is the Town Admin and Records Access Officer.” In its January 21, 2026 response, the Department stated, “[t]he Otis Police Department maintains no such records requested and has no such records in our custody.” In a January 22, 2026 email to the Department, Mr. McGowan stated, “I am writing to seek further clarification regarding a video depicting the escort of [an identified Hinsdale Police Sergeant]. The footage clearly identifies a marked Otis Police Department cruiser participating in the procession. Could you please formally confirm whether the Otis Police Department participated in this escort?” In its January 28, 2026 response, the Department stated, “[t]he Otis Police Department did take part in the procession for [an identified Hinsdale Police Sergeant]. All information on the precession came to my email address in Becket, and not Otis, which was forwarded to you when I received your request in Becket.” Current Appeal In his January 29, 2026 appeal to this office, Mr. McGowan stated, “[i]t is highly improbable—and indeed strains credulity—that Chief McDonough engaged in no internal communication or administrative coordination regarding this assignment. A reasonable inference may be drawn that records concerning officer assignments, shift logs, cruiser deployments, and payroll entries must exist…” Based on Mr. McGowan’s petition and the Department’s responses, it is unclear whether the Department possesses 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 Department must clarify whether it possesses responsive records.

Chief Kristopher G. McDonough SPR26/0298 Page 3 February 9, 2026 Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. McGowan 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. McGowan may 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: Scott McGowan