Mr. Dracut v. Dracut, Town of (SPR 20253852)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records January 7, 2026 SPR25/3852 Jared LaLiberte Town Clerk Town of Dracut 62 Arlington Street Dracut, MA 01826 Dear Mr. LaLiberte: On December 30, 2025, this office received your petition on behalf of the Town of Dracut (Town) seeking permission to charge for time spent segregating or redacting responsive records. 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 Town furnished a copy of the petition to the requestor, Mr. Dracut (requestor). G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On December 10, 2025, the requestor sought the following: [1] A list of all consultants, contractors, or temporary employees hired by the Town Manager or under the Town Manager’s office from January 1, 2023 to the present, including: Name of the consultant or contracting entity[;] Start and end dates of engagement[;] Scope of work or position title[.] [2] For each consultant identified: All invoices, payments, or other documentation of compensation paid by the Town[;] Any contract, agreement, or memorandum authorizing their hire[.] [3] For any consultant or contractor who replaced or supplemented an existing Town employee (full-time or part-time), provide: Name, title, and total compensation (salary plus benefits) of the employee replaced or supplemented[;] Any internal memo, email, or document explaining why a consultant was hired instead of using Town staff. [4] A list of all contracts executed by the Town of Dracut between July 1, 2023 and the present that have a term extending beyond a single fiscal year. If no such list exists, please provide the first page and signature page of each multi-year contract showing the contract term dates. 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

Jared LaLiberte SPR25/3852 Page 2 January 7, 2026 [5] For each multi-year contract identified: The invoice(s) submitted for the current fiscal year; and the payment record(s) showing the warrant number, amount paid, and payment date. [6] Any written policy, memorandum, guidance, or directive issued by the Finance Department, Town Manager, or Select Board regarding the payment of multi-year contracts, or the use of current fiscal year funds to pay for future-year services. The requestor subsequently modified the request on December 18, 2025 as follows: [1] Mandatory Scope Limitation For both requests, the scope is narrowed as follows:  Timeframe: The four most recent months for which responsive records exist as of the date of this letter.  Departments: Town Manager’s Office, Finance Department, and Procurement Office only.  The School Department is expressly excluded… [2] Records Requested (As Narrowed) [A] Multi-Year Contracts For the four-month period:  Existing multi-year contracts in effect during this period;  First page and signature page showing contract term;  Invoices and payment/warrant records issued during this period. [B] Consultants Under the Town Manager For the four-month period:  List of consultants/contractors engaged by or under the Town Manager;  Authorizing contract or agreement;  Invoices and payment records issued during this period. Petition to Assess Fees – Municipalities The Supervisor of Records (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

Jared LaLiberte SPR25/3852 Page 3 January 7, 2026 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. 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 determination 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 $25 per hour; 2) the amount of the fee is reasonable; and 3) the fee is not designed to limit, deter or prevent access to requested public records. Id. Fee Estimates – Municipalities A municipality may assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record except those records that are freely available for public inspection. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). The fees must reflect the actual cost of complying with a particular request. Id. A maximum fee of five cents ($.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 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 Petition In its petition, the Town argues the following in support of its request to charge for segregation and redaction under Exemption (c) of the Public Records Law: Upon receipt of the request, the Town has undertaken an initial, diligent search for responsive records and anticipates that it has records responsive to the request. However, even with the narrowing on the request due to the nature of the request the town anticipates having a large number of documents relating to this

Jared LaLiberte SPR25/3852 Page 4 January 7, 2026 request…. For the records identified above that are not readily available on the public website, there are a myriad of employment records and reports that will have to be reviewed and potentially redacted as they very likely contain information identified as statutorily exempt from the Public Records Law under exemption G. L. c. 4 § 7(26) exemption (c): personnel and medical files or information and any other materials or data relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Specifically, it is more than reasonable to assume that some, if not all, of the records pertaining to contacts, temporary staff, and of the responsible records include the following: Dates of Birth, Home Addresses, Social Security Numbers, banking and account information and other PII…. Under this exemption, “core categories of personnel information that are ‘useful in making employment decisions regarding an employee’” may be withheld from disclosure. Guide, p. 17. Notably, “employment applications, employee work evaluations, disciplinary documentation, and promotion, demotion, or termination information pertaining to a particular employee” are considered the core categories of personnel information. In light of the Town’s petition, I find the Town has met its burden to explain how, given the nature of the responsive records, the request could not prudently be completed without redaction or segregation. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). Conclusion Accordingly, I find that to the extent the responsive records contain the exempt information described above, the Town may assess a fee for segregation and redaction. This office encourages the requestor and the Town to continue 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 to 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 records sought more efficiently and affordably). Any subsequent fee estimate from the Town must be made in compliance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(viii) and G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii). Please note, the requestor has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the appropriate superior court. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(c), 10(d)(iv)(4), 10A(c).

Jared LaLiberte SPR25/3852 Page 5 January 7, 2026 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Mr. Dracut