Jonathan Gerhardson v. Russell, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20252159)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records August 1, 2025 SPR25/2159 Kevin M. Hennessey Chief of Police Russell-Montgomery Police Department 155 Highland Avenue Russell, MA 01071 Dear Chief Hennessey: I have received the petition of Jonathan Gerhardson appealing the response of the Russell-Montgomery 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 July 17, 2025, Mr. Gerhardson requested: [1] For each calendar year from 2019 to 2024, inclusive, and for the period of January 1, 2025, to the date this request is processed, records showing: [a] The total number of applicants for the position of Police Officer. [b] The total number of applicants from item (1a) who failed the department’s initial physical fitness entrance examination. [2] A copy of the current document(s) detailing the standards, components, and scoring for the physical fitness entrance examination required for all new applicants for the position of Police Officer. [3] Any and all public records, including internal memos, training directives, policy updates, or communications with the MPTC, concerning the Russell Police Department’s adoption and implementation of the MPTC Recruit Officer Course (ROC) Fitness Standards that became effective May 17, 2023. [4] A copy of the following currently effective records: [a] The official job description for the position of Police Officer, including any sections detailing physical demands or working conditions. [b] The lesson plan, curriculum, or syllabus for “Defensive Tactics” training provided to new recruits. [c] The department’s complete “Use of Force” policy. 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

Kevin M. Hennessey SPR25/2159 Page 2 August 1, 2025 The Department responded on July 22, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Gerhardson petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2159, 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 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 July 22nd Response In its July 22, 2025 response, the Department stated: Your detailed information request would require officers to research information that could not be achieved during our scheduled hours as we are a smaller department with a limited schedule. We estimate that it would take a minimum of 8 hours of time beyond scheduled hours to complete your requested task. The rate for pay would be $45.00 per hour. Payment would be required prior to any research. Although the Department has estimated that the process of locating, compiling, and preparing the responsive documents for production will take 8 hours of employee time, the Department has not provided sufficient explanation of why this amount of employee time is necessary. Specifically, the Department must clarify how many hours of search time and how many hours of segregation and redaction time it requires to produce the responsive records. The Department must also provide additional information regarding the tasks necessary to produce the responsive records.

Kevin M. Hennessey SPR25/2159 Page 3 August 1, 2025 Further, the Department is advised that under the Public Records Law, 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 skill necessary to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce a record requested, but the fee shall not be more than $25 per hour. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii). Municipalities may charge more than $25 per hour only if such rate is approved by the Supervisor under a petition pursuant to G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). Consequently, where I am not aware that the Department has submitted a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv) seeking permission to charge in excess of $25 per hour, the Department must clarify how it is permitted to assess an hourly rate greater than $25 per hour. The Department must also clarify whether it is a municipality of 20,000 people or less and thus permitted to assess a fee for the first 2 hours of employee time spent responding to the request, pursuant to G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii). For the reasons discussed above, I find the Department must revise its fee estimate or provide further explanation of how the fee assessed in its July 22, 2025 estimate is consistent with G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). This office encourages Mr. Gerhardson 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. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. Gerhardson 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. Gerhardson 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: Jonathan Gerhardson