Eric R. Brown v. West Springfield, Town of (SPR 20191084)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords June 4, 2019 SPR19/1084 Kate R. O'Brien, Esq. Town Attorney Town of West Springfield 26 Central Street, Suite 32 West Springfield, MA 01089 Dear Attorney O'Brien: I have received your petition on behalf of the Town of West Springfield (Town) seeking relief from its obligation to produce responsive records and permission to charge for time spent segregating or redacting responsive records. G. L. c. 66, § lO(c); G. L. c. 66, § lO(d)(iv); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). As required by law, the Town furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor. G. L. c. 66, § lO(c). Specifically, on March 11, 2019, Attorney Eric Brown requested "[a]ll motor vehicle accident reports for your municipality from March 4, 2019 through March 10, 2019." Petitions for an extension of time Under the Public Records Law, upon a showing of good cause, the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) may grant a single extension to an agency not to exceed 20 business days and a single extension to a municipality not to exceed 30 business days. In determining whether there has been a showing of good cause, the Supervisor shall consider, but shall not be limited to considering: (i) the need to search for, collect, segregate or examine records; (ii) the scope of redaction required to prevent unlawful disclosure; (iii) the capacity or the normal business hours of operation of the agency or municipality to produce the request without the extension; (iv) efforts undertaken by the agency or municipality in fulfilling the current request and previous requests; (v) whether the request, either individually or as part of a series of requests from the same requestor, is frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality; and (vi) the public interest served by expeditious disclosure. One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832• Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre • pre@sec.state.ma.us

Kate R. O'Brien, Esq. SPR19/1084 Page 2 June 4, 2019 G. L. c. 66, § lO(c). If the Supervisor determines that the request is part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass, and the requests are not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, the Supervisor may grant a longer extension or relieve the agency or municipality of its obligation to provide copies of the records sought. Id. The filing of a petition does not affect the requirement that a Records Access Officer (RAO) shall provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 36.06(4)(b). Request for relieff rom obligation to produce responsive records In its March 27, 2019 petition, the Town seeks "relief from the obligation to respond to the weekly public records requests submitted to it by Attorney Eric R. Brown." The Town states the "requests are made for the sole purpose of advancing his personal interests as a personal injury attorney. The requests are frivolous and not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity." Based on the information provided in its petition, I find that the Town has not met its burden to demonstrate "the requests are part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass and are not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity" as required by G. L. c. 66, § IO(c). Petitions for ability to assess fees The Town also requests "to charge Attorney Brown for the time spent responding to any future records requests, including time spent redacting and segregating such records." The Town states "Attorney Brown confirmed in an email that he is requesting the records for a commercial purpose." Further, the Town indicates "Attorney Brown's website .. .indicates that he is a personal injury attorney and highlights as his practice areas the following: "CAR ACCIDENT; MOTORCYCLE ACCIDENT; PEDESTRIAN ACCIDENT; HIT AND RUN ACCIDENT." The statute sets out a two-prong test for determining whether the Supervisor may approve a municipality's petition to allow the municipality to charge for time spent segregating or redacting records or to charge in excess of $25 an hour for the provision of public records. The first prong is whether the request for records was made for a commercial purpose. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d )(iv). It is my determination that this request was made for a commercial purpose.

Kate R. O'Brien, Esq. SPR19/1084 Page 3 June 4, 2019 The Town submitted its petition on March 27, 2019, more than ten business days after receipt of the request. In light of the fact the Town has not demonstrated it submitted a timely petition, permission to charge for time spent segregating or redacting responsive records cannot be granted. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(g). Conclusion For the reasons discussed above, I decline to grant the Town's request for relief of its obligation to respond to this request at this time. Further, I am unable to grant permission for the Town to charge for time spent segregating and redacting for this request at this time. See 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(g). The records must be provided consistent with the Public Records Law and its Access Regulations Sincerely, ~ u r r ~ Supervisor of Records cc: Eric Brown, Esq.