Kristine Demarco v. Hudson Housing Authority (SPR 20253734)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records January 5, 2026 SPR25/3734 Jaclyn A. Beaulieu Executive Director Hudson Housing Authority 8 Brigham Circle Hudson, MA 01749 Dear Ms. Beaulieu: I have received the petition of Kristine Demarco appealing the response of the Hudson Housing Authority (Authority) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). In multiple requests submitted on December 8, 2025 and December 10, 2025, Ms. Demarco requested the following: [1] Breakdown of how many hours per week maintenance employees work on federal versus state-funded sites[;] [2] The percentage of federal versus state funds paid as part of maintenance employees’ salary[;] [3] A breakdown of projected funding for the cost of a FY26 budgeted new maintenance truck[;] [4] A breakdown of federal versus state funds for the insurance and gas of an FY26 budgeted new maintenance truck, or a fee schedule/or every time the truck is on state property[;] [5] Financial statements of how and who purchased all current HHA-owned vehicles[;] [6] “Logbook records” of who has paid/or maintenance on all current HHA- owned vehicles[;] [7] Records of who pays/or insurance and gas on all current HHA-owned vehicles[;] [8] All statements and financial records of all vehicles owned by HHA[;] [9] Statements to any bank account that money is put into to pay for HHA owned vehicle expenses[;] [10] Internal payroll and finances broken down as to each project that maintenance does from day-to-day and their hours on federal versus state sites[;] [11] How maintenance payroll is broken down into federal versus state funds[;] 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

Jaclyn A. Beaulieu SPR25/3437 Page 2 January 5, 2026 [12] A breakdown of who paid/or the Springwell office at Brigham Circle[;] [13] A breakdown of who paid/or the Springwell office at Norma Oliver Village[;] [14] A breakdown of [an identified individual’s] wages since July 2024[;] [15] [An identified individual’s] job description[;] [16] A breakdown of [an identified individual’s] wages since July 2024[;] [17] A breakdown of [an identified individual’s] wages since July 2024[;] [18] Maintenance employee payroll prorations from July 2024-presenl[;] [19] Actual time clock hours of maintenance employees for how much time is spent on federal property and how much time is spent on state property[;] [20] Payroll of maintenance for all weeks since July 2024 broken down into what percentage of federal money and what percentage of state money paid their salary each week[;] [21] How much federal money and state money goes into the bank account that pays the bills[;] [22] Copies of the purchase order for all vehicles HHA owns[.] The Authority responded on December 15, 2025, providing a fee estimate. Unsatisfied with the Authority’s response, and objecting to the fees, Ms. Demarco petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR25/3734, was opened as a result. The Public Records Law The Public Records Law strongly favors disclosure by creating a presumption that all governmental records are public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A(d); 950 C.M.R. 32.03(4). “Public records” is broadly defined to include all documentary materials or data, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by any officer or employee of any agency or municipality of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). It is the burden of the records custodian to demonstrate the application of an exemption in order to withhold a requested record. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). To meet the specificity requirement a custodian must not only cite an exemption, but must also state why the exemption applies to the withheld or redacted portion of the responsive record. If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. 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

Jaclyn A. Beaulieu SPR25/3437 Page 3 January 5, 2026 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). Current Appeal In her December 19, 2025 appeal petition, Ms. Demarco asserts that the Authority is an agency as defined under the Public Records Law and further contends that, as such, the Authority may not assess a fee for the first four hours of employee time spent reproducing the records responsive to her request. The Authority’s December 19th Response In its December 19, 2025 response, the Authority provided a fee estimate of $50.00 and additionally provided the following in support of its fee estimate: . . . [M]unicipalities with a population of over 20,000 may not assess a fee for the first two hours of time spent searching for, compiling, segregating, redacting and reproducing a requested record. According to the decennial US. Census (2020) the town of Hudson, MA had a population of 20,092. We estimate this work to take approximately 4 hours. We are allowed to charge $25.00 per hour (after the first 2 hours) per the statute to complete the request. Therefore, the fee for completing this request is $50.00. Although the Authority has estimated that it will charge for 2 hours of employee time spent producing the responsive records, it is not clear from the Authority’s estimate how much time is allocated to search, and how much time is allocated for segregation or redaction of the records, if any. The Authority must provide additional information regarding the tasks involved in producing these records. Accordingly, the Authority must provide further details regarding its fee estimate. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv) (requiring the amount of the fee be reasonable). Under the Public Records Law, where appropriate, municipalities may include as part of

Jaclyn A. Beaulieu SPR25/3437 Page 4 January 5, 2026 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. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii). Accordingly, the Authority must confirm whether the hourly rate being used is equal to or less than that of the lowest paid employee with the necessary skills to perform the tasks. For the reasons discussed above, I find that the Authority must revise its fee estimate or provide further explanation of how the fee assessed is expressly provided for and consistent with G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). This office encourages Ms. Demarco and the Authority to communicate directly 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). Conclusion Accordingly, the Authority is ordered to provide Ms. Demarco with a response to her 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. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Kristine Demarco