Collin Dias v. Fall River, City of - Office of the City Clerk (SPR 20201361)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records August 26, 2020 SPR20/1361 Allison Bouchard City Clerk City of Fall River One Government Center, Room 227 Fall River, MA 02722 Dear Ms. Bouchard: I have received the petition of Collin Dias appealing the response of the City of Fall River (City) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, on August 3, 2020, Mr. Dias requested the following records: “Any record of city of Fall River expenditures, grant, or funds to the following entities: • Prima Care • Huttonschnure Management Corp • Ekron LLC • KRR Construction • Russco INC • D.F. Pray General Contractors • Coastline Plumbing & Mechanical, LLC Any contract between the City of Fall River, any department or agency of the City of Fall River and the following entities: • Prima Care • Huttonschnure Management Corp • Ekron LLC • KRR Construction • Russco INC • D.F. Pray General Contractors • Coastline Plumbing & Mechanical, LLC” The City provided a response on August 7, 2020, providing a fee estimate. Objecting to 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

Allison Bouchard SPR20/1361 Page 2 August 26, 2020 the fees, Mr. Dias petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR20/1361, was opened as a result. Fee estimates A municipality may assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record except those records that are freely available for public inspection. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). The fees must reflect the actual cost of complying with a particular request. Id. A maximum fee of five cents ($.05) per page may be assessed for a black and white single or double-sided photocopy of a public record. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(i). Municipalities may not assess a fee for the first (two) 2 hours of employee time to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce the record or records requested unless the municipality has 20,000 people or less. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii). Where appropriate, municipalities may include as part of the fee an hourly rate equal to or less than the hourly rate attributed to the lowest paid employee who has the necessary skill required to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce a record requested, but the fee shall not be more than $25 per hour. Id. However, municipalities may charge more than $25 per hour if such rate is approved by the Supervisor of Records under a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). A fee shall not be assessed for time spent segregating or redacting records unless such segregation or redaction is required by law or approved by the Supervisor of Records under a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). The City’s August 7th fee estimate In its August 7, 2020 estimate, the City states the following: Description Amount 74 invoices (average 5 pages) 370 Pages $ 0.10 Per Page $ 37.00 4 Contracts – Double sided 2000 Pages $0.10 Per Page $ 200.00 7 hours of labor (2 hours at no charge) 5 hours $ 24.4444 $ 122.22 Subtotal $ 359.22 In the City’s fee estimate, it indicates that it is assessing a fee for “7 hours of labor . . .” However, it is unclear why the City requires 7 hours to produce responsive records. The City must provide additional information explaining why the estimated amount of time is required and what tasks are involved in these 7 hours. Also, it is unclear whether the 7 hours of labor includes time to search for, compile, segregate, redact, or reproduce records as described under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(ii). Consequently, I find the City must clarify this estimate. Per G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(i), a maximum fee of five cents ($.05) per page may be assessed for a black and white single or double-sided photocopy of a public record. However, in the City’s estimate it states that it is assessing a fee of $0.10 for double sided photocopies. Where the

Allison Bouchard SPR20/1361 Page 3 August 26, 2020 statute allows a custodian of records to charge $0.05 for a double-sided photocopy, it is unclear why the City is charging $0.10 for such copies. Further, in his appeal petition, Mr. Dias states “. . . I told the city that I wish to receive all records electronically, so I ask this office to order the city to remove all costs when it comes to copying of record[s].” Where Mr. Dias indicates his preference to receive records electronically, it is uncertain why the City is assessing a fee for copying. The City must clarify these matters. Conclusion Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide Mr. Dias with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations as soon as practicable. 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 pre@sec.state.ma.us. Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Collin Dias