The city of Portland is refusing to release police reports about a now-former city official who was accused of assault.
First Amendment advocates say the denial of the Portland Press Herald’s public records request violates the state’s Freedom of Access Act and raises questions about whether the city is giving special protections to its employees.
“The city seems to be arguing that just because there’s an employee involved, the records should remain secret,” said Justin Silverman, executive director of the New England First Amendment Coalition, “which is absurd.”
City officials have denied a request and multiple appeals for police documents about an alleged February assault by Gregory Watson, who at the time was the city director of housing and economic development.
Watson resigned in August following the allegation. Portland police confirmed in March that Watson was issued a summons for assault, but authorities and city officials have repeatedly declined to share more information about the incident.
In July, the Cumberland County District Attorney’s Office announced it would not be pursuing charges against Watson because the allegations were not provable. He was paid $63,068 while on leave, according to the city.
Watson did not respond to a request for comment at a phone number listed for him.
REASON FOR THE DENIAL
In its denial to the Press Herald’s records request, the city cited Maine law regarding personnel records — specifically, a section that states municipal records containing “complaints, charges or accusations of misconduct” that may result in discipline are confidential.
This isn’t the first time the city has used this argument.
City officials cited the same statute in a denial letter earlier this year after the Press Herald filed a similar records request for police reports about an assault by a former code enforcement officer, Matthew Sarapas.
Police records in Sarapas’ case — which the Press Herald obtained from the Cumberland County District Attorney’s Office, not from the city — showed that Sarapas assaulted a woman while on the job. He was convicted in August.
Because Watson was not charged by the district attorney’s office, county officials won’t provide police records in his case.
City officials contend that their denial was based on the specific circumstances of Watson’s case and would not necessarily apply to all public employees. But they wouldn’t explain why the police reports would be considered confidential personnel records.
Mayor Mark Dion declined to comment on the denial.
City Councilor Kate Sykes said in an interview that the city’s denial seems appropriate because the content of the police reports “is a personnel issue.” She said the city should be protective of personnel documents, and that even city councilors don’t have access to that information.
Sykes also referenced the records denial in Sarapas’ case and said “it seems like the city is following a consistent policy.”
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
Some advocates, including Sigmund Schutz, an attorney for the Press Herald who specializes in the state’s public records laws, say the city’s interpretation of the law is incorrect and gives municipal employees special protection.
Silverman, the First Amendment attorney, said under Maine’s public records law, public employees should not receive more privacy than any other person who may have been accused of a crime.
“All of this goes to trust and making sure that we have the amount of transparency needed for us to trust that government is working as it should and no special treatment is given to anyone, public employee or not,” he said.
Silverman also said the city’s argument contradicts rulings by other courts in other New England states. He referenced a 2003 case in Massachusetts between the Worcester Telegram & Gazette and a police department in which an appeals court determined that police reports and arrest logs of a police officer did not count as private personnel records, despite the fact they were included in the officer’s internal affairs file.
He also referred to an appeal by the Press Herald against a public records denial by the city of Portland in 2013. The city refused to release a fire department report about a fireboat crash because it was attached to a disciplinary file. A judge ultimately determined that the factual, investigative details from the report should be released and potential disciplinary action could be withheld.
“In the court’s view, the City is interpreting (the personnel records law) too expansively,” Superior Court Justice Thomas Warren wrote in his decision.
Silverman said he understands those rulings to mean that public officials can’t exempt certain records from requests “only because they happen to be involved in a disciplinary proceeding or might be at some point in the future.”
Staff Writer Andrew Rice contributed to this story.