Polansky, Kevin v. Worcester, City of - Office of the District Attorney (SPR 20260950)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records March 30, 2026 SPR26/0950 Mark Relation, Esq. Records Access Officer Worcester County District Attorney’s Office 225 Main Street, G301 Worcester, MA 01608 Dear Attorney Relation: I have received the petition of Kevin P. Polansky, Esq., of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP, appealing the response of the Worcester County District Attorney’s Office (Office) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On February 11, 2026, Attorney Polansky requested “the following records:” Relating to RMV Internal Code 2023-0C4-002931 Crash Date: June 19, 2023 Crash Location: I-190 in Sterling, MA [An identified individual] Documents, media, and other information including but not limited to: [1] Collision analysis and reconstruction section (CARS) report; [2] Coroner’s report for …, deceased; [3] Body worn camera images and/or video and/or audio; [4] Cruiser mounted camera images and/or video and/or audio; [5] 911 calls regarding 06/19/2023 collision; [6] Law enforcement radio traffic regarding the 06/19/2023 collision; [7] Images, video, or other media of vehicles involved in, persons involved in, and/or scene of the 06/19/2023 collision; [8] Data from vehicle downloads (e.g. ‘blackbox’ data); [9] Total Station and/or similar data; and [10] Statements from witnesses and/or persons with knowledge of the 06/19/2023 collision and/or the resulting criminal investigation of [an identified individual] and/or Assabet Mack Service, Inc. The Office responded on February 11, 2026. Unsatisfied with the Office’s response, 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

Mark Relation, Esq. SPR26/0950 Page 2 March 30, 2026 Attorney Polansky petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/0950, 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. The Office’s February 11th Response On February 11, 2026, the Office stated, “[t]he District Attorney’s Office is unable to satisfy your request. We were unable to locate any records related to that incident.” Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Attorney Polansky contends: A large portion of the investigatory files are already available in the public domain through the completed court proceedings and accompanying media coverage. In fact, the court files in the underlying case against the truck driver, Commonwealth v. Hardaker, No. 2348CR001109, had many of the investigatory files available to the public through reproduction or reference. This included pretrial filings, discovery material, the incident report by the MSP, and the transcript from the four-day trial. Records in Existence 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

Mark Relation, Esq. SPR26/0950 Page 3 March 30, 2026 questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See 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 Office’s response, and the information provided in the requestor’s appeal petition, it is unclear whether the Office possesses records responsive to the request. If the Office does possess 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 Office is ordered to provide Attorney Polansky 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. Attorney Polansky may further appeal the substantive nature of the Office’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Kevin P. Polansky, Esq.