Sam Stecklow v. Peace Officer Standards and Training Commission (SPR 20252301)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records August 21, 2025 SPR25/2301 Kerri Johnson Records Access Officer Peace Officer Standards and Training Commission 84 State Street Boston, MA 02109 Dear Ms. Johnson: I have received the petition of Sam Stecklow, of Invisible Institute, appealing the response of the Peace Officer Standards and Training Commission (POST) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On May 13, 2025, Mr. Stecklow requested: copies of any electronic datasets maintained by MAPOST sufficient to show all officer employment changes since POST began tracking such changes between agencies. Please provide all electronic data that are co-located, including officer identifying information, employment dates, employing agencies, and reason for separation from agency. POST responded on May 28, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Stecklow petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2301, 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 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

Kerri Johnson SPR25/2301 Page 2 August 21, 2025 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). POST’s May 28th Response In its May 28, 2025 response, POST provided a fee estimate of $2,200.00. POST stated as follows: [1] Commission personnel will need to identify and retrieve officer employment changes since the Commission began tracking that information. The Commission will additionally need to compile “all electronic data that are co-located, including officer identifying information, employment dates, employing agencies, and reason for separation from agency.” The Commission estimates that it would take 80 hours to compile and segregate the responsive information for all officers. This is partly because the information is not tracked by officer history and is instead tracked by law enforcement agency. To create a report that gives the information requested, the Commission would have to compare employment changes shared with the Commission through four different platforms [=] 80 hours. The Commission anticipates that, once the records have been compiled and segregated, a staff member will need eight hours to review, analyze, and assess the potential public records for necessary redactions required by law [=] 8 hours. [2] One or more attorneys will undertake review and any necessary research and analysis. This process includes checking to ensure that any redactions, and all other aspects of the Commission’s response, are consistent with the Public Records Law and any other sources of law that provide a basis for withholding information. The process might require the analysis of statutory, regulatory, and case law, and application of such sources of law to the form of data at issue. It might also require reaching out to other Commission personnel to obtain more information regarding the Commission’s records [=] 4 hours. Total: 80 hours + 8 hours + 4 Hours = 92 hours 92 hours - 4 hours = 88 hours 88 hours x $25/hour = $2,200 Given the large volume of records you are requesting, the Commission asks for a modification. If no modification can be made, the Commission reserves the right to assess a fee of $25 per hour if it must spend more than four hours searching for,

Kerri Johnson SPR25/2301 Page 3 August 21, 2025 compiling, segregating, redacting, and reproducing requested records. POST explains the tasks involved in the 80 hours of the fee estimate as follows: The amount of time needed results from a combination of factors. First, the records will need to be evaluated to determine if they are responsive. Second, there are several forms of information made non-disclosable by law that the Commission will need to look for in the records, as discussed above. Third, determining whether a particular item of data implicates a certain source of law might, in some cases, call for a review and application of legal sources, and deliberation. And fourth, the technical steps in making redactions take a certain amount of time. Significantly, the above estimate is based on the Commission’s considerable experience in reviewing and redacting similar records in responding to numerous requests. POST also references Exemptions (a), (c), (j), (o), and (p) of the Public Records Law in support of redacting the requested records. With regard to Exemption (a), POST cites the following statutes: G. L. c. 150E, §§ 1, 5A(d); G. L. c. 6, § 167; G. L. c. 41, § 97D; G. L. c. 41, § 98F; G. L. c. 209A, § 8; G. L. c. 258B, § 3(h), (w); and/or G. L. c. 265, § 24C and G. L. c. 6E, § 8(c)(2). In its estimate, aside from Exemption (a), POST appears to be assessing a fee for redactions made under Exemptions (c), (j), (o), and (p) 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). Consequently, POST must clarify if the fee assessed includes time necessary to redact records under the cited Exemptions of the Public Records Law. POST must further confirm that $25.00 is the hourly rate attributed to the lowest paid employee who has the necessary skill required to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce the records requested. I encourage Mr. Stecklow and POST to communicate further in order to facilitate producing records efficiently and affordably. Mr. Stecklow may wish to narrow his request or provide additional factors to enable the search to be processed. G. L. c. 66, § l0(a)(i). POST must use its knowledge of the records to facilitate providing any responsive records. G. L. c. 66, § l0(a)(vii) (an agency or 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 agency or municipality to produce records sought more efficiently and affordably). For the reasons discussed above, I find that POST must revise its fee estimate or provide further explanation of how the fee of $2,200.00 assessed in its May 28th estimate is consistent with G. L. c. 66, § 10(d).

Kerri Johnson SPR25/2301 Page 4 August 21, 2025 Conclusion Accordingly, POST is ordered to provide Mr. Stecklow 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. Stecklow may appeal the substantive nature of POST’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Sam Stecklow