Jeanne L. Holmes-Kireilis v. Brockton, City of - Law Department (SPR 20202281)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records December 8, 2020 SPR20/2281 Aileen Bartlett, Esq. Assistant City Solicitor City of Brockton 45 School Street Brockton, MA 02301 Dear Attorney Bartlett: I have received the petition of Attorney Jeanne Holmes-Kireilis appealing the response of the City of Brockton (City) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Attorney Holmes-Kireilis requested “any and all records, including communications, either electronic or hard copy, account data, minutes, etc. pertaining to the posting of surety and/or holding back on release of lots, including but not limited to list of all owners, developers, builders or any other person(s) for every project processed through the city of Brockton between January 1, 2010 and the present, as well as which ones were required to post a surety, the amount of the surety, or if there was a condition of holding back on releases of lots instead of the posting of surety as well as the number of lots held back and then their release.” The City responded on November 10, 2020, providing a sample of responsive records, and providing a fee estimate of $175 for the production of additional records. Unsatisfied with the City’s response, Attorney Holmes-Kireilis petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR20/2281, was opened as a result. Fee Estimates If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. 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 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

Aileen Bartlett, Esq. SPR20/2281 Page 2 December 8, 2020 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 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 under a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). Current Appeal In its November 10th response, the City provides a fee estimate of $175 for 7 hours of work to produce responsive records. Subsequent to the opening of this appeal, the City provided a supplemental response on November 23, 2020, producing “a list of cash bonds provided by developer/contractors.” In its estimate, the City informs Attorney Holmes-Kireilis that “[i]f you would like to modify the scope of your request to include only specific developments, this would likely reduce the fee,” and notes that Planning Board meeting agendas and minutes are available online. Attorney Holmes-Kireilis has also expressed a willingness to limit the time frame of her request. This office encourages the requestor and the City to continue to communicate to facilitate providing records more efficiently and affordably. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vii) (a municipality shall suggest a reasonable modification of the scope of the request or offer to assist the requestor to modify the scope of the request if doing so would enable the municipality to produce records sought more efficiently and affordably). If after subsequent communications outstanding issues remain, Attorney Holmes-Kireilis may file a further appeal. Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Jeanne Holmes-Kireilis, Esq.