← Back to Search
Samantha Jones v. Sharon, Town of- Police Department (SPR 20250425)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Public records appeal decision · Filed 02-13-2025
ClosedFee PetitionDecision
SPR 20250425 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Samantha Jones concerning records held by Sharon, Town of- Police Department, opened 02-13-2025. Type: Fee Petition. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Public records appeal decision.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20250425
- Case Type
- Fee Petition
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Samantha Jones
- Custodian
- Sharon, Town of- Police Department
- Date Opened
- 02-13-2025
- Date Closed
- 02-18-2025
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records February 18, 2025 SPR25/0425 Jennifer Leavitt Records Access Officer Sharon Police Department 213 S Main Street Sharon, MA 02067 Dear Ms. Leavitt: On February 13, 2025, this office received your petition on behalf of the Sharon Police Department (Department) seeking permission to charge for time spent segregating or redacting responsive records, and a waiver of statutory limits on fees that may be assessed in responding to the request. 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 Department furnished a copy of the petition to the requestor, Samantha Jones. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L.c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On February 12, 2025, Ms. Jones requested, “[p]olice reports, dispatcher logs pertaining to [an identified individual] 1/1/10-present.” Petition to Assess Fees – Municipalities 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). 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. 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 this request was not made for a 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 Jennifer Leavitt SPR25/0425 Page 2 February 18, 2025 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 $25 per hour; 2) the amount of the fee is reasonable; and 3) the fee is not designed to limit, deter or prevent access to requested public records. Id. Fee Estimates – Municipalities A municipality may assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record except those records that are freely available for public inspection. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). The fees must reflect the actual cost of complying with a particular request. Id. A maximum fee of five cents ($.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, the Department requests “permission to charge the following fees associated with the search and segregation of the requested records.” In a supplemental email sent to this office on February 18, 2025 the Department stated, “[it is] only looking to make redactions related to exemption A of the public records law.” Please be advised, records custodians may assess fees for time spent segregating or redacting records where such segregation or redaction is required by law. See 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2)(d) (stating that fee for segregation or redaction is permissible when approved by Supervisor or when required by law). Where the Department only seeks to assess fees as required by law under Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law, I find it unnecessary to opine on whether the Department may assess fees for segregating and redacting the records. Jennifer Leavitt SPR25/0425 Page 3 February 18, 2025 Conclusion In light of the above, I find it unnecessary to opine on the Department’s fee petition. Further, this office encourages the requestor and the Department to continue to communicate to facilitate providing records more efficiently and affordably. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vii). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Samantha Jones