Balestracci, Lukas v. Boston, City of - Police Department (SPR 20261254)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 17, 2026 SPR26/1254 Christine O’Donnell, Esq. Records Access Officer Boston Police Department 1 City Hall Square, Room 615 Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney O’Donnell: I have received the petition of Attorney Michaela Roberta Martin Strout, of the Strategic Litigation Unit, Committee for Public Counsel Services, appealing the response of the Boston 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 6, 2026, Lukas Balestracci, also of the Strategic Litigation Unit, Committee for Public Counsel Services, requested “Internal Affairs Report No. 2021-0021 regarding [a named individual].” The Department responded on January 6, and January 20, 2026, and assigned reference number B000052-010626 to this request. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, Attorney Balestracci petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR26/1254, 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. 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. SPR26/1254 Page 2 April 17, 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. The Department’s January 6th and January 20th Responses In its January 6, 2026 response, the Department acknowledged receipt of the request, and in its January 20, 2026 response, the Department stated that “due 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 her appeal petition, Attorney Strout contends that “as of today, we have not received another response or records from the BPD.” Timeframe for Providing Records G. L. c. 66, § 10(b) provides, in pertinent part, that if the magnitude or difficulty of a 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. Balestracci submitted the request on January 6, 2026, 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 Attorney Strout 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

Christine O’Donnell, Esq. SPR26/1254 Page 3 April 17, 2026 office. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of the response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Attorney Strout 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: Michaela Roberta Martin Strout, Esq.