foia new-hampshire public-records
May NH police legally keep secret the number of bullets purchased
<p>I asked a few questions of my government and phrased it as an open records request. I got an answer on half of them and a response on all of them.</p>
<p>The police claim they cannot answer the question, 'How many bullets did the police purchase for 2010 and 2020?'. Here is the phrasing used in the denial of my public records request: &quot;The release of how many bullets purchased in 2010 &amp; 2020  may not be releasable per RSA 91:A.  It could constitute the disclosure of investigative techniques or procedures. &quot; I found, <a href="http://nhdcyf.info/rsa/91-a.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">RSA (Revised Statutes Annotated) 91-A</a>. One concern I have is whether or not they may secretly use &quot;emergency&quot; powers and lie about it claiming they can deny requests to discover police procedures.</p>
<p>I couldn't find language that allows hiding procedures or general investigations by citizens of the police. Are the police legally allowed to hide basic information like the number of bullets purchased? If they aren't, what legal recourse is open to the citizenry denied such public records?</p>
<p>-- UPDATE --</p>
<p>&quot;Your request in the amount of bullets and purchase has not been denied at this time.  I was stating that it is possible that it could constitute the disclosure of investigative techniques or procedures.&quot;</p>

<p>It is common in state FOI or open access laws to exempt from disclosure records pertaining to police investigations. In some cases police procedures are also exampled.  91-A:5 Exemptions. (included in the document linked in the question) lists 6 exemptions, part of number IV is:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Without otherwise compromising the confidentiality of the files, nothing in this paragraph shall prohibit a body or agency from releasing information relative to health or safety from investigative files on a limited basis to persons whose health or safety may be affected.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This seem to imply an exemption for &quot;investigative files&quot;, although no such exemption is specified in  91-A.</p>
<p>However, I find it hard to see how the amount of ammunition purchased by the state as a whole reveals &quot;police procedures&quot; in a way which would compromise security or be reasonably exempt. In any case the state budget is almost surely a matter of public record, and it may well indicate the dollar amount of ammunition purchases, even if it does not give the number of rounds purchased.</p>
<p>Or proceedings may be taken under the law. 91-A:7 Violation says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Any person aggrieved by a violation of this chapter may petition the superior court for injunctive relief. The courts shall give proceedings under this chapter priority on the court calendar. Such a petitioner may appear with or without counsel. The petition shall be deemed sufficient if it states facts constituting a violation of this chapter, and may be filed by the petitioner or his counsel with the clerk of court or any justice thereof. Thereupon the clerk of court or any justice shall order service by copy of the petition on the person or persons charged.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>One might inquire of the office of the court clerk for more details on how this is done, and any fees.</p>
