Greta Jochem v. Holyoke, City of - Police Department (SPR 20210882)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records April 13, 2021 SPR21/0882 Officer Caron L. Porter Holyoke Police Department 138 Appleton Street Holyoke, MA 01040-5706 Dear Officer Porter: I have received your petition on behalf of the Holyoke Police Department (Department) seeking relief from its obligation to produce responsive records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). As required by law, the Department furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor, Greta Jochem of the Daily Hampshire Gazette. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). In this matter, the Department is requesting relief from Ms. Jochem’s request for “...[t]he internal affairs report, and any other accompanying documentation, for all the cases in the ‘Holyoke Police Department Professional Standards Division Complaint Log.’” Petitions to Assess Fees - Municipality 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) 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

Officer Porter SPR21/0882 Page 2 April 13, 2021 Current Petition In its petition dated April 5, 2021, the Department states “[t]hese requests are a part of a series of contemporaneous requests, that are frivolous and designed to intimidate and/or harass the Holyoke Police Department.” The Department explains, “[a]sking for 10 years of internal affairs records, in and of itself would be a tremendous strain on time, efforts and resources that the Holyoke Police Department simply does not have. Some of these files are upwards of 500 pages and contain sensitive Information that would have to be reviewed and redacted before dissemination.” The Department notes, “[w]e strongly believe that the harm of not having a productive manner in which to deal with Citizen Complaints in a way that would allow us to properly investigate, discipline and possibly terminate potential problem officers, far outweighs the need for the public to view a widely cast net of information regarding the department's Internal affair records. For those reasons we would like to petition not to disclose any records based on the following exemption: Exemption (f) - The Investigatory Exemption (f), the investigatory exemption, provides custodians a basis for withholding: investigatory materials necessarily compiled out of the public view by law enforcement or other investigatory officials the disclosure of which materials would probably so prejudice the possibility of effective law enforcement that such disclosure would not be in the public interest. The exemption allows investigative officials to withhold materials that could compromise investigative efforts if disclosed.” The Department further asserts, “[i]f we are not allowed to deny the requested records based on exemption (f), we ask that the FOI request not be allowed as it stands. We are simply asking for the scope of the FOIA request to be more specific in nature and narrowed down considerably.” Conclusion Based on the information provided in its petition, I find that the Department has not demonstrated the requests are frivolous and not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, as required by G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). This office encourages Ms. Jochem and the Department 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).

Officer Porter SPR21/0882 Page 3 April 13, 2021 Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Greta Jochem