MA Public Records Search
← Back to Search

Conan Stone v. Boston, City of - Public Records (SPR 20252896)

Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to respond · Filed 10-02-2025

ClosedAppealPetitioner Won

SPR 20252896 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Conan Stone concerning records held by Boston, City of - Public Records, opened 10-02-2025. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to respond.

Case Details

Case Number
20252896
Case Type
Appeal
Case Subtype
Initial
Status
Closed
Requester
Conan Stone
Custodian
Boston, City of - Public Records
Date Opened
10-02-2025
Date Closed
10-17-2025

PDF Document

Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records October 17, 2025 SPR25/2896 Grace Jung Director of Public Records City of Boston 1 City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201 Dear Ms. Jung: I have received the petition of Conan Stone appealing the response of the City of Boston (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On September 8, 2025, Mr. Stone requested, “[a]ll emails and documents related to funding to improve McKinney Park, Ringer Park, or Chandler Pond.” The City responded on September 9 and September 22, 2025. Unsatisfied with the responses, Mr. Stone petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2896, was opened as a result. While this appeal was pending, the City provided further responses on October 3 and October 6, 2025. 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). 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

Grace Jung SPR25/2896 Page 2 October 17, 2025 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 City’s Responses In its September 9, 2025 response, the City assigned Mr. Stone’s request reference number R004682-090825. The City stated, “[the] request is currently overly broad and vague . . . we ask that you narrow the scope of what you are seeking by Monday September 22, 2025. . . . Requestors typically narrow their request by identifying a more specific date range or a more specific type of record.” In its September 22, 2025 response, the City assessed a fee of $15,000.00 to provide Mr. Stone with 60,956 responsive records. Specifically, the City stated the following: For your request, the City must review all of the records before they can be released. First, the City must compile the responsive records by reviewing all records to determine which are responsive to your request and which are not. Second, the City must redact and segregate the records to ensure material protected by law is not released. In this request, the records contain communications between a City of Boston attorney and employee or a City of Boston employee conveying a City attorney’s legal opinion. Such records qualify as privileged attorney-client communications and therefore, must be segregated and redacted for confidential information before they can be released. The City estimates that staff can compile, redact, and segregate approximately one record per minute. At this rate, based on the number of potentially responsive records noted above, the City expects it will take 1,015.93 hours to compile, redact, and segregate these records. . . . The lowest hourly rate for a person capable of reviewing the records responsive to your request is approximately $25 per hour. At a rate of $25 per hour, accounting for the first two hours without charge, the corresponding cost of fulfilling your request would be $15,000. In its October 3rd response, a representative of the City representative stated, “I have alerted representatives from the department regarding this matter in an effort to resolve any outstanding issues regarding your public records request.” The City representative further advised, “I will provide an update to you once additional information is provided to me by the department.” In its October 6, 2025 response, the City reiterated that it was not currently withholding records, and that it would produce responsive records if Mr. Stone paid the assessed fee or modified his request to reduce the volume of responsive records. In light of the City’s responses, I encourage Mr. Stone and the City to communicate directly in order to facilitate producing records efficiently and affordably. See G. L. c. 66, §

Grace Jung SPR25/2896 Page 3 October 17, 2025 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). Conclusion If outstanding issues remain after Mr. Stone and the City communicate further as described above, Mr. Stone may file an appeal within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Conan Stone