← Back to Search
Mark Gould v. North Attleborough, Town of - Town Clerk (SPR 20250665)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Public records appeal decision · Filed 03-10-2025
ClosedFee PetitionDecision
SPR 20250665 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Mark Gould concerning records held by North Attleborough, Town of - Town Clerk, opened 03-10-2025. Type: Fee Petition. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Public records appeal decision.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20250665
- Case Type
- Fee Petition
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Mark Gould
- Date Opened
- 03-10-2025
- Date Closed
- 03-11-2025
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 March 11, 2025 SPR25/0665 Patricia McNielly Town Clerk Town of North Attleboro 43 South Washington Street North Attleboro, MA 02760 Dear Ms. McNielly: On March 10, 2025, this office your petition on behalf of the Town of Attleboro (Town) seeking permission to charge for time spent segregating or redacting responsive 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, Mark Gould, Esq. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On February 19, 2025, Attorney Gould requested “[a]ll emails sent from the Council President . . . between February 19, 2023 and February 18, 2025 including all attachments and email chains related to the emails.” Petition to assess fees – Municipalities The 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 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 understanding that this request was not made for a commercial purpose. 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 Patricia McNielly SPR25/0665 Page 2 March 11, 2025 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 $25 per hour; 2) the amount of the fee is reasonable; and 3) the fee is not designed to limit, deter or prevent access to requested public records. Id. Petitions seeking a waiver of statutory limits to fees assessed to segregate and/or redact public records must be made within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(g). Fee Estimates – Municipalities A municipality may assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record except those records that are freely available for public inspection. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). The fees must reflect the actual cost of complying with a particular request. Id. A maximum fee of five cents ($.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 Town requests “to allow North Attleborough to charge additional fee’s to cover the time spent segregating and redacting records[.]” Conclusion The Town submitted its petition on March 10, 2025, more than ten business days after receipt of the request. In light of the fact that the Town has not demonstrated it submitted a timely petition, permission to charge for time spent segregating or redacting responsive records cannot be granted. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(g). Please note, however, this determination does not preclude the Town from charging for segregation and redaction that is required by law. This office encourages Attorney Gould and the Town to continue to communicate directly in order to facilitate providing records more efficiently and affordably. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vii). Patricia McNielly SPR25/0665 Page 3 March 11, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Mark Gould, Esq.