Kimberly Pfierffer v. Hadley, Town of - Town Clerk (SPR 20243394)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records December 23, 2024 SPR24/3394 Jessica Spanknebel Town Clerk Town of Hadley Town Hall 100 Middle Street Hadley, MA 01035 Dear Ms. Spanknebel: On December 19, 2024, this office received your petition on behalf of the Town of Hadley (Town) seeking an extension of time to produce records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). As required by law, it is my understanding that the Town furnished a copy of the petition to the requestor, Kimberley Pfieffer. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On December 17, 2024, Ms. Pfieffer requested the following records: [1] A copy of the entire Compensation & Classification Study completed by The Collins Center. Including to, but not limited to, the scoring of each position broken down by individual category as these scores ultimately places each position in a “grade” category and the complete job description for each position that was utilized to calculate the score[;] [2] If the scoring for each position provided by The Collins Center was only used for reference, please advise who participated in the process and all meeting minutes for which the scores were discussed and calculated if the ones provided to me during union negotiations differ from the ones completed by The Collins Center. If two sets of scores were calculated, was a vote taken to approve one versus the other for implementation? [3] Meeting minutes for which a discussion and vote were taken to accept the 2024 Compensation and Classification Study completed for the Town of Hadley by The Collins Center and the date the study would be officially implemented for all current and newly hired employees[;] 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

Jessica Spanknebel SPR24/3394 Page 2 December 23, 2024 [4] All public meeting minutes in which the Compensation and Classification Study was discussed following the meeting the study was “accepted.” Meeting minutes for which a vote was taken and passes regarding the decision by the Selectboard to not consider any requests for changes in grade and/or step placement after the acceptance of the Compensation and Classification Study by The Collins Center[;] [5] What is the status of the creation and implementation of a policy for an employee to challenge their grade and/or step placement? What is the time frame? Who will hear, discuss and provide the result? Does the employee have the option for this to be discussed in public or executive session? Would a union representative be required to be present for the discussion? Petition 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. G. L. c. 66, § 10(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) must 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).

Jessica Spanknebel SPR24/3394 Page 3 December 23, 2024 Current Petition In its petition, the Town requests “an extension of 30 business days or until February 14, 2025, which would allow the Board to discuss the request and prepare any applicable records and its response on January 8 and its subsequent meetings[.]” The Town provides the following information in support of its request: [A]lthough received by the Town on December 17, 2024, the Select Board’s then- next scheduled meeting was on December 18, 2024, and so the Board was not able to add the request to the agenda in order to review the requested executive session minutes, among other records, in accordance with the Open Meeting Law. G. L. c. 30A, § 20(b). The Select Board’s next meeting is on January 8, 2025. Further, the records identified as potentially responsive to the request are extensive. In light of the need to collect, segregate and examine the records, as well as the capacity of the Town to produce the records without an extension, the Town has established good cause to permit an extension of time. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c)(i)-(iii). The Town is granted an extension of 30 business days. Conclusion As described above, I find that the Town has established good cause for a time extension of 30 business days. Please note, Ms. Pfieffer 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(c), 10(d)(iv)(4), 10A(c). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Kimberley Pfieffer Ryan Clemens, Esq., Mead, Talerman & Costa, LLC.