Renee LaPlume v. Ayer, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20250431)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records February 27, 2025 SPR25/0431 Robert Mackie Records Clerk Ayer Police Department 54 Park Street Ayer, MA 01432 Dear Mr. Mackie: I have received the petition of Renee Laplume appealing the response of the Ayer Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On November 7, 2024, Ms. Laplume requested copies of all records associated with a specific address and nine named individuals, for the period January 2013 to the present. Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR25/0431 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (December 10, 2024). In my December 10th determination, I ordered the Department to revise its fee estimate or provide further explanation of how the fee assessed is consistent with G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). The Department provided a response on December 24, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Ms. Laplume petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/0431, was opened as a result. 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 (two) 2 hours of employee time to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce the record or records requested unless the 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

Robert Mackie SPR25/0431 Page 2 February 27, 2025 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). The Department’s December 24th Response In its December 24, 2025 response, the Department assessed a fee of $975.00 to provide Ms. Laplume with the recordings associated with 123 responsive incidents, and provided the following estimate of the time necessary to do so: [1] 10 Minutes to review and segregate a requested incident.  Identify the Year, Month, Date, and Time of the requested Incident  locate and identify corresponding 9-1-1 line recordings within the time frame.  locate and identify corresponding Business line recordings within the time frame.  Locate and identify corresponding radio transmissions recordings within the time frame.  Save all recordings that relate to the incident being researched[;] [2] 5 minutes to review any/all audio for necessary redactions. For instance, calls from other parties or with other parties in them will have to have their phone numbers redacted if given or if they disclose any information redactable according to statute (a)[;] [3] 5 minutes to apply and save any/all redactions. In its response, the Department further stated that it would be assessing a rate of $25.00 per hour, and that all individuals with the skill necessary to respond to the request were compensated at a rate greater than $25.00 per hour. In a February 27, 2025 email communication to this office, the Department clarified that each of the responsive recordings were approximately 5 minutes long, but some were “much longer.” The Department further clarified that it would be reviewing the responsive records for the names and telephone numbers of private citizens under Exemption (c) of the Public Records Law, and “[a]ny Victim & Victim Family Information or Harassment Prevention Order Plaintiff information …” under Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law.

Robert Mackie SPR25/0431 Page 3 February 27, 2025 Fee Waivers G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(v) provides the following with respect to waiving a fee for the production of responsive records: the records access officer may waive or reduce the amount of any fee charged under this subsection upon a showing that disclosure of a requested record is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government and is not primarily in the commercial interest of the requestor, or upon a showing that the requestor lacks the financial ability to pay the full amount of the reasonable fee. Please be advised, although the Supervisor may encourage fees to be waived, the Supervisor may not mandate that a records access officer waive fees assessed for complying with a public records request; rather, as described above, the records access officer may waive or reduce the amount of any fee upon a showing of various factors. See G. L. c. 66, § 10 (d)(v); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2)(k). Reasonableness of the Fee Estimate Under the Public Records Law a fee may 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 pursuant to a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(ii); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). Although the Department has indicated that it intends to redact certain information pursuant to Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law, the Department must clarify which statute requires it to do so. Further, where I am not aware that the Department has submitted a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv), seeking permission to charge for redactions performed under Exemption (c), the Department must clarify if the fee assessed includes time necessary to redact records under Exemption (c) of the Public Records Law. For the reasons discussed above, I find the Department must revise its fee estimate or provide further explanation of how the fee assessed is expressly provided for and consistent with G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). This office encourages Ms. Laplume and the Department to communicate further in order 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 the records sought more efficiently and affordably). Any revision to the request would result in the requirement to issue a revised fee estimate.

Robert Mackie SPR25/0431 Page 4 February 27, 2025 Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Ms. Laplume with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within ten business days. A copy of any such response must be provided to this office. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of the response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Ms. Laplume may appeal the substantive nature of the Department’s response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Renee Laplume