George and Jen Burden v. Nashoba Valley Regional Dispatch District (SPR 20253038)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records October 30, 2025 SPR25/3038 Anne Camaro Executive Director Nashoba Valley Regional Dispatch District 270 Barnum Road Devens, MA 01434 Dear Ms. Camaro: I have received the petition of George and Jennifer Burden appealing the response of the Nashoba Valley Regional Dispatch District (District) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On September 16, 2025, Mr. and Ms. Burden requested: [1] [A]ny and all records . . . regarding calls, communications, or interactions involving [two identified individuals] . . . between January 1, 2024 and September 15, 2025. This includes, but is not limited to: Call logs[,] Recordings[,] Emails[,] Letters[,] Text messages[,] Notes or internal memos[;] [2] [A]ll records of disciplinary actions involving [an identified individual]. The District responded on September 29, 2025, providing a fee estimate in response to Item 1 of the request and claiming that the records responsive to Item 2 are exempt from disclosure in their entirety under Exemption (c) of the Public Records Law. See G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c). Unsatisfied with the District’s response and objecting to the fees, Mr. and Ms. Burden petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3038, 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). 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

Anne Camaro SPR25/3038 Page 2 October 30, 2025 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). Current Appeal In their October 17, 2025 appeal petition, Mr. and Ms. Burden state that their appeal, “is based on the excessive fee demanded . . . for access to records that are directly relevant to a civil action . . . against our family.” They contend, “[t]he excessive fee appears designed to deter access and shield misconduct from scrutiny” and further request that this office “[r]eview the fee assessment for compliance with the Public Records Law and applicable regulations” and “[o]rder the release of the requested records at no or reduced cost[.]” Upon review of the appeal, it appears Mr. and Ms. Burden are not objecting to the District’s claims under Exemption (c) for withholding records responsive to Item 2 of the request. Fee Waivers G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(v) provides the following with respect to waiving a fee for the production of responsive records: the records access officer may waive or reduce the amount of any fee charged under this subsection upon a showing that disclosure of a requested record is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government and is not primarily in the commercial interest of the requestor, or upon a showing that the requestor lacks the financial ability to pay the full amount of the reasonable fee. Please be advised, although the Supervisor may encourage fees to be waived, the Supervisor may not mandate that a records access officer waive fees assessed for complying with a public records request; rather, as described above, the records access officer may waive or reduce the amount of any fee upon a showing of various factors. See G. L. c. 66, § 10 (d)(v); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2)(k).

Anne Camaro SPR25/3038 Page 3 October 30, 2025 The District’s September 29th Fee Estimate In its September 29, 2025 response, the District provided a total fee estimate of $2,550.00 and further stated the following in support of its fee estimate: Due to the extensive nature and frequency of these calls, fulfilling the portion of this request related to call recordings alone will require a substantial amount of staff time. We have identified 393 log entries/recordings that would need to be retrieved. Each call will require the following steps: locating the log entry, searching the recording system, reviewing the audio, redacting any personally identifiable information, and saving the redacted audio. This process takes an average of 15–20 minutes per call. We estimate it will take approximately 98 hours of work to complete this portion of your request. The estimated cost is $2,450.00 which must be paid in advance before work can begin. (393*15=5,895/60=98 hours *$25 per hour =$2,450.00) Additionally, we estimate 4 hours to compile the associated call logs and emails, at an estimated cost of $100.00, which is also due in advance before we proceed. Although the District has estimated that the process to compile the responsive records for production will take a total of 102 hours of employee time, it is unclear how the District requires this many hours to compile responsive records. Specifically, it is not clear from the District’s estimate how much time is allocated to search, and how much time is allocated for segregation and/or redaction of the records. It is additionally uncertain why the District requires “an average of 15–20 minutes per call [recording]” to “[locate] the log entry, [search] the recording system, [review] the audio, [redact] any personally identifiable information, and [save] the redacted audio.” Further, it is unclear how many records responsive to “call logs and emails” there are, or the number or minutes that the District must spend per page for review. The District must provide further details regarding the tasks involved and what each task entails, including the time it is allocating to compiling, segregating, redacting and reproducing the requested records. Accordingly, the District must provide further details regarding its fee estimate. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv) (requiring the amount of the fee be reasonable). Where the District indicates in its fee estimate that it is assessing a fee for redactions of call recordings, please note that pursuant to 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 under 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). I am not aware that the District has submitted a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). As such, the District must provide information about whether the responsive records contain information that is required by law to be segregated or redacted, as well as the applicable statutes, if any. Further, 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

Anne Camaro SPR25/3038 Page 4 October 30, 2025 municipality has 20,000 people or less. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii). It is unclear whether the District is assessing a fee for the first two hours of employee time in responding to the request. The District fee estimate also lacks confirmation that the rate of $25 per hour is the lowest paid employee who is capable of performing the task(s) involved. The District must clarify this. For the reasons discussed above, I find the District must revise its fee estimate or provide further explanation of how the fee estimate of $2,550.00 is consistent with G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). This office encourages Mr. and Ms. Burden and the District to communicate to facilitate providing records more efficiently and affordably. Mr. and Ms. Burden may wish narrow their request. 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 District is ordered to provide Mr. and Mss. Burden with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within 10 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. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: George and Jennifer Burden