MA Public Records Search
← Back to Search

Michael Dreslinski v. Holden, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20160452)

Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 07-07-2016

ClosedAppealPetitioner Won

SPR 20160452 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Michael Dreslinski concerning records held by Holden, Town of - Police Department, opened 07-07-2016. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.

Case Details

Case Number
20160452
Case Type
Appeal
Case Subtype
Initial
Status
Closed
Requester
Michael Dreslinski
Custodian
Holden, Town of - Police Department
Date Opened
07-07-2016
Date Closed
07-12-2016

PDF Document

Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Shawn A. Williams Supervisor ofR ecords July 12,2016 SPR16/444, SPR14/452 Mr. David A. Armstrong Chief of Police Town of Holden 1370 Main Street Holden, MA 021520 Dear Chief Armstrong: I have received the petitions of Michael Dreslinski appealing responses of the Town of Holden Police Department (Department) to his requests for public records. G. L. c. 66 § 10(b); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2). Specifically, 1. On January 17, 2016 Mr. Dreslinski requested copies of"Holden Police Department policies and procedures that govern complaints of misconduct made against Holden Police Department members, in effect on March 17, 2015". In a response dated March 11,2016 the Department provided a fee estimate of$58.28 for the provision of records responsive to this request (SPR16/444); and 2. On May 23, 2016 Mr. Dreslinski requested copies ofrecords "under the name Michael Dreslinski and/or John Rousseau that reference or relate to phone number 911-355-9127. In a response dated June 6, 2016 the Department provided a fee estimate of $75.77 for the provision of records responsive to this request (SPR16/452). Mr. Dreslinski appealed both fee estimates. It is Mr. Dreslinski's position that the Department may only charge a maximum of $1.00 per page pursuant to G. L. c. 66, § 1O (a) and is not permitted to charge a fee for searching for, segregating or mailing public records pursuant to 950 C.M.R. 32.06. Given that that both records requests involve fee estimates provided by the Department both appeals will be addressed by this determination. Fees for copies ofp ublic records A custodian of records may assess a reasonable fee for complying with a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(2) (where cost of complying with a request for public records is expected to exceed ten dollars ($10.00), custodian of records shall OneAshburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 · (617) 727-2832 ·Fax (617) 727-5914 www.sec.state.ma. us/p re

Chief of Police David A. Armstrong SPR16/444; SPR14/452 Page2 July 12, 2016 provide written good faith estimate). Absent specific statutory authority to the contrary, the fees to be charged for complying with requests for public records are established by the Public Records Access Regulations (Regulations). See 950 C.M.R. 32.06 (fees for public records). Under the Regulations, a custodian of records may assess a maximum fee of five cents ($.05) per page for a black and white single or double-sided photocopy of a public record. See 950 C.M.R. 32.06(1)(a). In addition to the copying fee, the Regulations provide that in cases where search or segregation time is necessary a custodian of records may charge a pro-rated fee based on the hourly rate of the lowest paid employee who is capable of performing the task. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(l)(c). The Regulations define "search time" as the time needed to locate, pull from the file, copy and refile public records, and "segregation time" as the time used to redact data that is exempt from non-exempt material. 950 C.M.R. 32.03. The search and segregation fees must reflect the actual cost of complying with a particular request. G. L. c. 66, § 10 ( a). A custodian may assess the actual cost of postage. 950 C.M.R 32.06(3). Municipal police departments may respond to certain requests for public records by providing fee estimates as indicated by statute: ... The following fees shall apply to any public record in the custody of the state police, the Massachusetts bay transportation authority police or any municipal police department or fire department: for preparing and mailing a motor vehicle accident report, five dollars for not more than six pages and fifty cents for each additional page; for preparing and mailing a fire insurance report, five dollars for not more than six pages plus fifty cents for each additional page; for preparing and mailing crime, incident or miscellaneous reports, one dollar per page; for furnishing any public record, in hand, to a person requesting such records, fifty cents per page. A page shall be defined as one side of an eight and one-half inch by eleven inch sheet of paper. G. L. c. 66, 10(a) With regards to request number 1 (SPR16/444), Mr. Dreslinski did not specifically request the reports enumerated in the statute; furthermore, responsive records are not able to be "furnished in hand" to him, therefore, G. L. c. 66, 10(a) does not apply to fees associated with the provision of records responsive to this request. I find the Department's use of 950 C.M.R. 32.06 for assessing its March 11 fee estimate proper. Please be advised, however, that under the current Regulations, a custodian of records may assess a maximum fee of five cents ($.05) per page for a black and white single or double-sided photocopy of a public record. See 950 C.M.R. 32.06(1 )(a).

Chief of Police David A. Armstrong SPR16/444; SPR14/452 Page 3 July 12, 2016 With regards to request number 2 (SPR16/452), again Mr. Dreslinski did not specifically request the reports enumerated in the statute, nor can any responsive records be "furnished in hand" to him, G. L. c. 66, 10(a) does not apply to fees associated with the provision of records responsive to this request. I find the Department use of 950 C.M.R. 32.06 in assessing its June 6 fee estimate proper. It should be noted that in the Department's June 6 response it informed Mr. Dreslinski that phone number 911-355-9127 is not a valid phone number. Mr. Dreslinski may wish to consider reviewing his request to confirm the phone number prior to paying any fees associated with that request. Order Accordingly, the Department is hereby ordered to provide Mr. Dreslinski with a revised response to his January 17, 2016 request for records (SPR16/444). The response by the Police Department must be prepared in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, its Regulations. A copy of any such response must be provided to this office. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of this response to this office at .o:.=~='-'-=o:r==='-== rvisor of Records cc: Mr. Michael Dreslinski