February 2, 2024

Avery Emison
Intern for the Strategic Litigation Unit
75 Federal Street, 6th Floor
Boston, MA 02110

Good afternoon,

The New Jersey Office of the State Comptroller (OSC) received your Open
Public Records Act (OPRA) request on February 1, 2024.  The seven (7)
business-day deadline to respond to your request is February 12, 2024.
This response is being provided to you on February 2, 2024.  

Your request sought access to the following pursuant to OPRA and the
common law right of access concerning OSC’s report titled “The High Price
of Unregulated Private Police Training to New Jersey,” published on
December 6, 2023: “List of all Massachusetts law enforcement agencies for
which its employees (law enforcement officers) attended seminars given by
the ‘Street Cop Training’ company.”

OSC is an independent State agency that conducts audits and investigates
government agencies throughout New Jersey. N.J.S.A. 52:15B-8; N.J.S.A.
52:15C-5. OSC’s investigative authority is set forth in N.J.S.A. 52:15B-1
et seq. Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 52:15B-7, OSC has “establish[ed] a full-time
program of investigation, to receive and investigate complaints concerning
alleged fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement of State funds, designed to
provide increased accountability, integrity and oversight of every public
entity recipient of State funds.” N.J.S.A. 52:15B-7. To accomplish these
important governmental oversight goals, OSC is afforded “all powers
necessary to carry out its duties and functions and to fulfill” its
statutory responsibilities, including the power to conduct investigations
and issue subpoenas and the authority to call on any State entity for any
needed information, resources, assistance and cooperation. N.J.S.A.
52:15B-6,-8.

On December 6, 2023, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 52:15B-15 and N.J.S.A.
52:15C-11, OSC issued a public report titled “The High Price of
Unregulated Private Police Training to New Jersey.”  That public report is
attached hereto.  Notwithstanding the publication of the report, OSC
clearly states in the body of the report that its investigation is
ongoing. (“The High Price of Unregulated Private Police Training to New
Jersey,” dated December 6, 2023 at 8).  Further, in light of the report’s
findings, pursuant to its authority under N.J.S.A. 52:15B-11 and N.J.S.A.
52:15C-12, OSC also made referrals to appropriate agencies “including to
the Attorney General, the Division on Civil Rights, and internal affairs
departments for further investigation into OSC’s publicly reported
findings, and into additional concerning conduct identified in OSC’s
review of the Conference presentations.” (“The High Price of Unregulated
Private Police Training to New Jersey,” dated December 6, 2023 at 2).  OSC
also made several recommendations in its published report including the
following: “Recommendation 3. Given that many comments were made during
the Conference touching on the protected categories of color, race,
ethnicity, and/or national origin, the Attorney General should consider
issuing a Directive or other guidance to law enforcement agencies
addressing whether the fact of any officer’s attendance at or involvement
in the Conference may need to be disclosed to comply with any criminal
discovery obligations.”  (“The High Price of Unregulated Private Police
Training to New Jersey,” dated December 6, 2023 at 38).  To the extent
applicable, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 52:15B-12a and N.J.S.A. 52:15C-13a, OSC
is required to “preserve the confidentiality of the existence of any
ongoing criminal investigation.”  Further, pursuant to N.J.S.A.
52:15C-14d, “OSC shall not disclose any document or information to which
access is provided that is confidential or proprietary” and, as indicated
in the public report, “[a]ll content and materials referenced in the
report are the property of their respective owners.”  (“The High Price of
Unregulated Private Police Training to New Jersey,” dated December 6, 2023
at 7, fn. 19).

Against this backdrop of an ongoing investigation by OSC and OSC’s
referrals to the Attorney General, the Division on Civil Rights, and
internal affairs departments for further investigation, OSC responds to
your request pursuant to OPRA and the common law right of access as
follows:

First, your request is overly broad and improper under OPRA in that it
seeks a “[l]ist of all Massachusetts law enforcement agencies for which
its employees (law enforcement officers) attended seminars given by the
‘Street Cop Training’ com[.]” As stated in its public report, “OSC was not
able to conclusively determine . . . exactly who attended [the October
2021 Conference] or viewed it online because Street Cop produced
incomplete and inaccurate information. (“The High Price of Unregulated
Private Police Training to New Jersey,” dated December 6, 2023 at 9 and fn
26.)(emphasis added). Further, your request seeks documents beyond the
October 2021 Conference to include attendance (in person or online) at
every seminar given by Street Cop with no designated time frame and
essentially amounts to a blanket request.  Blanket requests for every
document a public agency has on file or a wholesale request for general
information are improper under OPRA.  See Gannett N.J. Partners, LP v.
Cty. of Middlesex, 379 N.J. Super. 205, 212 (App. Div. 2005); MAG Entm’t,
LLC v. Div. of Alcoholic Beverage Control, 375 N.J. Super. 534, 549 (App.
Div. 2005); Bent v. Twp. of Stafford Police Dep’t, 381 N.J. Super. 30,
36-37 (App. Div. 2005); Spectraserv, Inc. v. Middlesex Cty. Utils. Auth.,
416 N.J. Super. 565, 578 (App. Div. 2010); N.J. Builders Ass’n v. N.J.
Council on Affordable Hous., 390 N.J. Super. 166, 178-79 (App. Div.
2007).  OPRA also does not contemplate “open-ended searches of an agency's
files” nor is it “intended as a research tool litigants may use to force
government officials to identify and siphon useful information.” MAG
Entertainment, LLC v. Div. of Alcohol Beverage Control, 375 N.J. Super.
534, 546-49 (App. Div. 2005). “The requestor must identify the records
sought with specificity. The request may not be a broad, generic
description of documents that requires the custodian to search the
agency's files and ‘analyze, compile, and collate’ the requested
information.” Bart v. Passaic Cty. Public Housing Agency, 406 N.J. Super.
445, 451 (App. Div. 2009) (citations omitted); Bent v. Twp. of Stafford
Police Dep't, 381 N.J. Super. 30 (App. Div. 2005) (holding that
OPRA allows requests for specific records, not requests for general
information, data, or statistics).  Your request essentially amounts to a
blanket request and therefore is improper under OPRA.  For this reason,
your request is denied. 

Your request is also denied because it seeks records concerning an ongoing
OSC investigation. N.J.S.A. 47:1A-3(a) exempts from access records related
to an ongoing investigation where “the inspection, copying or examination
of such record or records shall be inimical to the public interest.”
Gannett N.J. Partners, L.P. v. Cty. of Middlesex, 379 N.J. Super. 205, 214
(App. Div. 2005) (“N.J.S.A. 47:1A-3 reflects a general legislative
recognition of the public interest in law enforcement and other
investigatory agencies maintaining the confidentiality of documents
relevant to ongoing investigations.”).  OSC clearly states in its public
report that its investigation is ongoing. (“The High Price of Unregulated
Private Police Training to New Jersey,” dated December 6, 2023 at
8).  Moreover, OSC has referred its findings to the Attorney General, the
Division on Civil Rights, and various internal affairs departments for
further investigation. Id. at 2.  Separately, OSC recommended that the
Attorney General, as the chief law enforcement officer in the state,
consider issuing a Directive or other guidance to law enforcement agencies
to determine whether “any officer’s attendance at or involvement in the
Conference may need to be disclosed to comply with any criminal discovery
obligations.”  Id. at 38.  For these reasons, your requests are denied. 

Your request also seek records pursuant to the common law right of
access. However, because OSC’s interest in protecting confidential records
from disclosure outweighs the requestor’s interest in accessing such
records, your requests are hereby denied.

In addition to the reasons for denial set forth above, OSC reserves the
right to supplement the reasons with any additional basis for exception to
public access as may hereinafter also be determined to apply.

In light of the above, OSC considers its response to your request as
completed.  

Thank you,

Robert Shane

Custodian of Records

show quoted sections