Rachel Bonds v. East Bridgewater, Town of - Public School District (SPR 20230321)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records February 24, 2023 SPR23/0321 Elizabeth L. Legault Superintendent of Schools East Bridgewater Public School District 143 Plymouth Street East Bridgewater, MA 02333 Dear Ms. Legault: I have received your petition on behalf of the East Bridgewater Public School District (District) seeking permission to charge for time spent segregating or redacting responsive records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). As required by law, the District furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor. Id. On February 13, 2023, Rachel Bonds submitted a public record request seeking: [A]ny and all purchasing records from 1/1/2015 to current. The request is limited to readily available records without physically copying, scanning, or printing paper documents. Any editable electronic document is acceptable. The specific information requested from your record-keeping system is: 1. Purchase order number. If purchase orders are not used a comparable substitute is acceptable, i.e., invoice, encumbrance, or check number[;] 2. Purchase date[;] 3. Line item details (Detailed description of the purchase)[;] 4. Line item quantity[;] 5. Line item price[;] 6. Vendor ID number, name, address, contact person and their email address[;] Petition to Assess Fees The Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) may approve a petition from a municipality to charge for time spent segregating or redacting or to charge in excess of $25 per hour, if the Supervisor determines that 1) the request is for a commercial purpose or 2) the fee represents an actual and good faith representation by the municipality to comply with the request. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). 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

Elizabeth L. Legault SPR23/0321 Page 2 February 24, 2023 In rendering such a decision, the Supervisor is required to consider the following: a) the public interest served by limiting the cost of public access to the records; b) the financial ability of the requestor to pay the additional or increased fees; and c) any other relevant extenuating circumstances. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). 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 the request is not for a commercial purpose. The second prong of the test is whether the fee represents an actual and good faith representation by the municipality to comply with the request. The Supervisor must consider 1) if the fee is necessary such that the request could not have been prudently completed without the redaction or segregation or fee in excess of $25 per hour; 2) the amount of the fee is reasonable; and 3) the fee is not designed to limit, deter or prevent access to requested public records. Id. Fee Estimates A municipality may assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record except those records that are freely available for public inspection. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). The fees must reflect the actual cost of complying with a particular request. Id. A maximum fee of five cents ($.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 2 (two) 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). Current Petition In its petition dated February 16, 2023, the District asserts: The District understands that pursuant to G.L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii), it cannot assess a fee for time spent segregating or redacting records unless such segregation or redaction is required by law or approved by your office. The District intends, in actual and good faith, to comply with the request. Additionally, according to the

Elizabeth L. Legault SPR23/0321 Page 3 February 24, 2023 U.S. Census, the Town of East Bridgewater has a population of 14,465, therefore pursuant to 950 CMR 32.07(2)(m), the District may assess a fee for the first two (2) hours of time spent searching for, compiling, segregating, redacting and reproducing the requested records. However, the requested records must be redacted where many of the responsive documents will meet the below inclusive, not exhaustive, exemptions set forth in G.L. c. 4, § 7(26).  Exemption (c) o The requested documents contain materials or data relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. In particular, the records likely contain personal contact information for individuals that have received payment/s from the District. It is understood that home addresses may be withheld pursuant to Exemption (c). See SPR 13/077.  Exemption (o); Exemption (p) o The requested documents may contain the home and/or personal email address and/or home telephone numbers of District employees or family members of District employees that have received payment/s from the District. Accordingly, the District seeks to assess fees for time spent segregating and redacting records that fall within statutory exemptions beyond Exemption (a) of G.L. c. 4, §7(26) given the likelihood that the aforementioned categories of information need to be redacted. The District estimates that, if redaction is needed, it will take an average of 1-1.5 minutes to review and redact each page of the responsive documents. This number is based on the District’s experience in reviewing and redacting documents responsive to a public records request given the need to carefully read each page, make the necessary determinations regarding whether the record contains exempt information, redact any confidential information contained in the records if found, and the possibility that other individuals may need to be consulted throughout this process. The District does not seek to assess fees at a rate higher than $25 an hour, although the hourly rate of the lowest-paid employee qualified to complete the request exceeds that rate. In light of the District’s petition, I find the District has met its burden to explain how, given the nature of the responsive records, the request could not prudently be completed without redaction or segregation. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). To the extent the responsive records contain the exempt information as described above, the District may assess a fee for the segregation and redaction of such exempt material.

Elizabeth L. Legault SPR23/0321 Page 4 February 24, 2023 Conclusion Accordingly, I find that to the extent the responsive records contain the exempt information described above, the District may assess a fee for segregation and redaction. This office encourages Ms. Bonds and the District to continue to communicate to facilitate providing records more efficiently and affordably. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vii). Please note, Ms. Bonds has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the appropriate superior court. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(4), l0A(c). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Rachel Bonds