Christian Tobin v. Dalton, Town of - Fire District (SPR 20251024)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 25, 2025 SPR25/1024 Melanie Roucoulet Treasurer/Clerk Dalton Fire District Town of Dalton 20 Flansburg Avenue Dalton, MA 01226 Dear Ms. Roucoulet: I have received the petition of Christian Tobin appealing the response of the Dalton Fire District (District) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On February 22, 2025, Mr. Tobin requested eleven categories of records, concerning certain grants, funds, training records, reports, and email communications. Prior Appeal and Petition This request was the subject of a prior appeal and a petition seeking an extension of time and relief from the obligation to produce records. See SPR25/0750 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (March 26, 2025) and SPR25/0813 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (April 1, 2025). In my March 26th determination, I found that the District must revise its fee estimate or provide further explanation of how its assessed fee was consistent with G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). In my April 1st determination, I found that where the District’s petition was submitted more than twenty business days after receipt of the request, the District’s petition could not be granted. The District provided a response on April 8, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Tobin petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/1024, 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 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

Melanie Roucoulet SPR25/1024 Page 2 April 25, 2025 ($.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 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 District’s April 8th Response In its April 8, 2025 response, the District assessed a fee of $3,521.00 - $3,721.00 to provide the responsive records. The District estimated that it would require 137 - 145 hours to search for and redact the responsive records. The District stated that redaction would be necessary under Exemptions (c), (f), and (i). To perform these tasks, the District assessed an hourly rate of $25.00, and confirmed that this was equal to or less than the hourly rate of the lowest paid employee with the skill necessary to respond to the request. The District further estimated that it would be necessary to copy 1,920 pages of records, at a rate of $0.05 per page. 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).

Melanie Roucoulet SPR25/1024 Page 3 April 25, 2025 Reasonableness of the Fee Estimate Although the District has estimated that the process of compiling, reviewing, and preparing responsive documents for production will take 137 – 145 hours of employee time, the District has not provided sufficient explanation of why this amount of employee time is necessary. The District must provide a specific time estimate, rather than a range of possible time estimates. The District must also advise how many hours it requires to search for responsive records, and the tasks involved in conducting the search. Further, the District must clarify how many hours it requires to segregate and redact the responsive records. Additionally, it appears from the District’s response that it plans to redact the responsive records under Exemptions (c), (f), and (i) of the Public Records Law. 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). I am not aware that the District has submitted a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv), seeking permission to charge for segregation and redaction not required by law. Consequently, the District may not charge for time spent redacting records pursuant to Exemptions (c), (f), and (i). For the reasons discussed above, I find the District must revise its fee estimate or provide further explanation of how the fee of $3,521.00 - $3,721.00 assessed in its April 8, 2025 estimate is consistent with G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). This office encourages Mr. Tobin and the District 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. Conclusion Accordingly, the District is ordered to provide Mr. Tobin 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. Mr. Tobin may appeal the substantive nature of the District’s response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1).

Melanie Roucoulet SPR25/1024 Page 4 April 25, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Christian Tobin