Hopkinton Violated APRA But Not Intentionally, State Finds

HOPKINTON, RI — The Town of Hopkinton did not violate public records law when it redacted witness names on a police report — but it did violate the law by failing to give proper written notice to the man who sought a copy of the police report from the town, state authorities said.

Carl Grenier last October filed a request under the state's Access to Public Records Act, or APRA, seeking a copy of a police report. The town lawyer sent Grenier the report, but witness names, who were town librarians, were redacted.

Grenier said the town violated the APRA when it redacted the names, but the town said the redactions were proper because the incident did not result in an arrest, and that disclosing the names would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy.

Live in Hopkinton? Click here to subscribe to our breaking news alerts delivered to your inbox and mobile devices. You can also download our Patch mobile app on Android or iPhone.

The town, however, acknowledged that it failed to provide Greneir with a written response that cited the specific legal exemptions it was invoking to support the redactions.

The Office of Attorney General Peter Neronha found the town violated the APRA by failing to provide a proper written response, but that the redactions made to the police incident report were permissible and proper. The full six-page decision can be read here.

The attorney general's office said there is no need for injunctive relief, and that there was no evidence that the town's violation was willful, knowing, or reckless.

The APRA stated that, unless exempt, all records maintained by any public body shall be public records and every person shall have the right to inspect and/or to copy such records.