Jonathan Medeiros v. Fall River, City of - Office of the Corporation Counsel (SPR 20251809)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records June 30, 2025 SPR25/1809 Kenneth Fredette, Esq. Assistant Corporation Counsel City of Fall River 1 Government Center Fall River, MA 02722 Dear Attorney Fredette: On June 24, 2025, this office received your petition on behalf of the City of Fall River (City) seeking permission to waive statutory limits to fees and 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 Department furnished a copy of the petition to the requestor, Jonathan Medeiros, of Fall River Firefighters L1314. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On May 27, 2025, Mr. Medeiros requested: [1] [R]ecords that document when these [identified] vehicles were out of service on a non-permanent basis[;] [2] Records showing what additional vehicles were in service during those same [specified] time periods, including Medic 7 through Medic 12 and any vehicles operating under the Mobile Integrated Health (MIH) division of FREMS[;] [3] Documentation indicating if these [identified] vehicles responded to any 911 calls while the primary units were shut down[;] [4] Records showing how many times the MIH Coordinator was contacted for mutual aid to cover 911 calls during these periods and how many times these requests were denied due to previously scheduled appointments[.] For the time period of January 1, 2024, through December 31, 2024, and January 1, 2025, through May 27, 2025, Mr. Medeiros sought the following records: 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

Kenneth Fredette, Esq. SPR25/1809 Page 2 June 30, 2025 [1] Staffing Records: Any documentation (including reports, rosters, or software data such as Aladtec or equivalent) showing daily staffing of Medic 1-6, Squad 11, Medic 7-12, and MIH units[;] [2] Correspondence: Any and all emails or communications from the EMS Chief, Deputy EMS Chief, or Operations staff referencing the status, shutdown, or reassignment of any of the above-mentioned vehicle[;] [3] Service Records: Any documentation indicating response activity (or lack thereof) for Medic 7-12 or MIH-assigned vehicles during times when front-line units were shut down[;] [4] MIH Coordinator Activity: Records reflecting requests for MIH Coordinator mutual aid assistance, outcomes of those requests (granted or denied), and the reason for denial if due to existing appointments[;] [5] Log Books and Legal Records: Copies of log books or other legally maintained documentation tracking in-service/out-of-service status of EMS vehicles, as well as any logs documenting vehicle assignments during 911 calls[;] [6] Internal Reports or Memos: Any directives, memos, or reports pertaining to the staffing or operational availability of the units mentioned above. In an email to the City on June 23, 2025, Mr. Medeiros stated, “…we’re happy to narrow the scope of the request to a one-year window: from May 28, 2024, through May 27, 2025” 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 placed for a commercial purpose.

Kenneth Fredette, Esq. SPR25/1809 Page 2 June 30, 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). Petition to Assess Fees In its petition, the Department requests to charge fees for segregation and redaction of the responsive records. In an email to the requestor and this office on June 25, 2025, the City provides the following in support of its request: [T]he City of Fall River hereby petitions under G.L. c. 4 §7(26)(c) for permission to charge a reasonable fee for redactions from a large volume of emails and other records sought for disclosure of personnel and medical information… The City notes in this request that the requestor’s original record request noted “We are not requesting any personally identifiable information. Therefore, all records should redact: Names of EMS personnel, Name of patients and Names of Medical facilities or hospitals.”

Kenneth Fredette, Esq. SPR25/1809 Page 2 June 30, 2025 Based on the information provided in its fee petition, I find the City has met its burden to explain how, given the nature of the responsive records, the request could not prudently be completed without segregation or redaction. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). Fee in Excess of $25.00 per Hour In its petition, the City requests to charge a fee of $40.54 per hour, and provides the following in support of its request: The lowest-paid EMS employee that has access to such records is a Lieutenant at $40.54 per hour. The scale of this request is enormous. The email searches alone will require the IT Department to cull through thousands of emails using six separate reference terms, which revealed 9,372 possible relevant emails fitting the description of the record sought. Once obtained in that volume, a manual review of each email would take place and finally redaction of names of EMS personnel, patient names and medical facilities or hospitals. Other searches also will involve hours of review, copying and redaction before submission. A total of three meetings with the EMS Chief and Deputy Chief have taken place and I have updated the Union Secretary each time. Based on the information provided in the City’s petition, I find the City has not met its burden to explain how the request could not prudently be completed without assessing a fee in excess of $25.00 per hour. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). Accordingly, permission to charge in excess of $25.00 per hour cannot be granted at this time. Conclusion Accordingly, to the extent the responsive records contain the exempt information as described above, the City may assess a fee for segregation and redaction. However, I find that the City has not met its burden to assess a fee in excess of $25.00 per hour. Please note, Mr. Medeiros has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the appropriate superior court. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10A(c). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Jonathan Medeiros