Emma Rindlisbacher v. Bristol County Treasurer’s Office (SPR 20250499)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records March 5, 2025 SPR25/0499 Jane L. Gonsalves ARPA Coordinator Bristol County Treasurer’s Office 9 Court Street Taunton, MA 02780 Dear Ms. Gonsalves: I have received the petition of Emma Rindlisbacher appealing the response of the Bristol County Treasurer’s Office (Office) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On January 28, 2025, Ms. Rindlisbacher requested, “...receipts for the following programs: the Together summer camp, and any receipts for TRUE Diversity? If there is a way to generate a report showing some sort of ledger for these programs and if that would take less time, could you please send me that? Please limit this request to documents between Jan 1, 2020 and the date the search is conducted.” Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR25/0342 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (February 19, 2025). In my February 19th determination, it was my understanding that the Office intended on providing a further response to Ms. Rindlisbacher. The Office provided a response on February 20, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Ms. Rindlisbacher petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/0499, 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

Jane L. Gonsalves SPR25/0499 Page 2 March 5, 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 Office’s February 20th Response In its February 20, 2025 response, the Office provided a fee estimate of $54.75. In support of the estimate, the Office stated, The fee for the subject records request was calculated as follows: 5 cents/page and $25/ hour for my time spent searching for the records, collating and copying/ scanning them. The hourly rate is based on my salary as the sole employee who handles the ARPA applications. No time was spent on redacting or segregating records. The total amount requested was $104.75 for 95 pages @ 5 cents/page and 4 hours of labor @$25/hr. [and] ... the amount of labor being charged at $25/hr is therefore 2 hours instead of 4. This would reduce the fee requested to $54.75. Current Appeal In her February 20, 2025 petition to this office, Ms. Rindlisbacher stated, “[t]hese records involve no redactions and therefor there are no relevant fees. I do not believe that these proposed fees comply with public records law.” Although the Office has estimated that the process of “…searching for…, collating and copying/scanning…” of the records will take 4 hours of employee time, it is unclear how the Office requires this amount of time to produce responsive records. The Office must provide further details regarding its fee estimate, including how much of the estimated time is allocated to searching, collating, and copying/scanning of the responsive records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv) (requiring the amount of the fee be reasonable). For the reason discussed above, I find the Office 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).

Jane L. Gonsalves SPR25/0499 Page 3 March 5, 2025 Conclusion Accordingly, the Office is ordered to provide Ms. Rindlisbacher with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within 10 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. Rindlisbacher may appeal the substantive nature of the Office’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Emma Rindlisbacher