Dan McGlynn v. Shelburne Police Department (SPR 20252293)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records August 13, 2025 SPR25/2293 Gregory D. Bardwell Chief of Police Shelburne Police Department 623 Mohawk Trail Shelburne, MA 01370 Dear Chief Bardwell: On August 7, 2025, this office received your petition on behalf of the Shelburne Police Department (Department) seeking an extension of time to produce records, requesting permission to assess fees for time spent segregating and redacting responsive records and a waiver of statutory limits on fees that may be assessed in responding to the request. 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, Dan McGlynn. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On July 7, 2025, Mr. McGlynn requested the following records: [1] All internal affairs investigation records, including but not limited to: civilian complaints, internal complaints or reports, disciplinary findings or actions taken, final investigation summaries or conclusions pertaining to all currently employed officers and the chief of the Shelburne Police Department[;] [2] All communications (including emails, letters, memoranda, and any other written or electronic correspondence) between the Chief of Police and officials from the Mohawk Trail Regional School District from January 1, 2023 to July 7, 2025 including but not limited to: Members of the School Committee, School liaison officers (if applicable). Previous Petition This request was the subject of a previous petition from the Department. See SPR25/1965 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (July 14, 2025). In my July 14th determination, I found that the Department had established good cause for a time extension of 15 business days. 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

Chief Gregory D. Bardwell SPR25/2293 Page 2 August 13, 2025 Petition for an Extension of Time Under the Public Records Law, upon a showing of good cause, the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) may grant a single extension to an agency not to exceed 20 business days and a single extension to a municipality not to exceed 30 business days. In determining whether there has been a showing of good cause, the Supervisor shall consider, but shall not be limited to considering: (i) the need to search for, collect, segregate or examine records; (ii) the scope of redaction required to prevent unlawful disclosure; (iii) the capacity or the normal business hours of operation of the agency or municipality to produce the request without the extension; (iv) efforts undertaken by the agency or municipality in fulfilling the current request and previous requests; (v) whether the request, either individually or as part of a series of requests from the same requestor, is frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality; and (vi) the public interest served by expeditious disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). If the Supervisor determines that the request is part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass, and the requests are not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, the Supervisor may grant a longer extension or relieve the agency or municipality of its obligation to provide copies of the records sought. Id. The filing of a petition does not affect the requirement that a Records Access Officer (RAO) must provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 36.06(4)(b). Current Petition In its petition, the Department requests “an additional 15 business days to complete this process, as permitted under M.G.L. c. 66, § 10(c) and 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)” and provides the following information in support of its request: [F]ollowing a thorough preliminary review, it is clear that this request will require significantly more time than initially estimated. Mr. McGlynn’s request seeks a substantial volume of sensitive records, including internal affairs investigations, personnel complaints, and all correspondence between the Shelburne Police Department and the Mohawk Trail Regional School District from January 1, 2023 to July 7, 2025. [T]he Shelburne Police Department is a small agency with only six full-time

Chief Gregory D. Bardwell SPR25/2293 Page 3 August 13, 2025 personnel and no administrative staff assigned to public records requests. Where I previously granted the Department an extension of time, I am unable to grant additional time. See SPR25/1965. To the extent possible, the Department must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. 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. 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

Chief Gregory D. Bardwell SPR25/2293 Page 4 August 13, 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). Petition to Assess Fees In its petition, the Department submits “the following fee estimate for [your] approval” and provides the following information in support of its request: Document Review and Redaction Hourly Rate: $63.66 Estimated Time: 40 hours Estimated Cost: $2,546.40 Email Conversion and Organization Estimated Time: 3 hours Estimated Cost: $190.98 Total Estimated Cost: $2,737.38 [T]hese records contain legally protected information pertaining to minors, students, personnel matters, and other exempt categories under M.G.L. c. 4, § 7(26), including (c), (f), and (n). Therefore, all responsive documents must undergo extensive review and redaction to ensure full legal compliance. Conclusion As described above, where I previously granted the Department an extension of time, I am unable to grant additional time. See SPR25/1965. To the extent possible, the Department must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. The Department submitted its petition on August 7, 2024, more than ten business days after receipt of the request. In light of the fact the Department 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 Department from charging for segregation and redaction that is required by law.

Chief Gregory D. Bardwell SPR25/2293 Page 5 August 13, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Dan McGlynn