Azizian, Hasmik v. Worcester, City of (SPR 20261022)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 3, 2026 SPR26/1022 Michael Manning Records Access Officer Law Department, Room 301 City of Worcester 455 Main Street Worcester, MA 01608 Dear Mr. Manning: I have received the petition of Hasmik Azizian appealing the response of the City of Worcester (City) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On February 28, 2026, Hasmik Azizian requested “all records to include incident reports and body camera footage pertaining to police responses to the address of 316 (A/B) Highland street, Worcester, MA, 01602, from the dates of January 1st, 2022 through February 28th, 2026.” I understand the City assigned reference number P085307-022826 to this request. Previous Petition This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR26/0964 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (March 23, 2026). In my March 23rd determination, I granted the City an extension of 20 business days, and found that the City may assess fees for segregation and redaction of the responsive records. Concurrent with its fee petition, the City provided Hasmik Azizian with a fee estimate on March 16, 2026. Objecting to the fees, Hasmik Azizian petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR26/1022, 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

Michael Manning SPR26/1022 Page 2 April 3, 2026 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 Appeal In the appeal petition, Hasmik Azizian argues the following: The estimated fee of $192.50 presents a significant financial hardship for me and limits my ability to access these public records. I respectfully request that this fee be waived or substantially reduced on that basis. I do not have the financial means to pay this amount. Access to public records should not be effectively denied due to cost, particularly when the request is made in good faith. 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). The City’s March 16th Fee Estimate In its March 16, 2026 response, the City gives a total fee estimate of $192.50 and provides the following information in support of its fee estimate:

Michael Manning SPR26/1022 Page 3 April 3, 2026 In order to fulfill the request above, the City must undertake a review of and redact where necessary the approximately 15 pages responsive report. Providing written narratives requires locating the responsive reports, extracting the reports from the Records Management System, and reviewing each document to locate information not subject to disclosure. Redactions are then applied to the document; a second review is performed prior to disclosure to confirm that the document has been properly redacted. On average, this process requires 2 minutes of labor per page, not including finalization of the record and preparation of the written response. Providing the records responsive to the portion of your requests that seeks body worn camera footage is a technically demanding and labor-intensive endeavor. A member of the City’s Law Department must find the responsive footage in the Evidence.com platform. This search process is completed by locating the incident number from the corresponding police report to use as the search query. Once located, the footage must be redacted and then extracted for production. The application of video redaction, even with use of available tools to maximize efficiency, often involves frame-by-frame review. The process requires locating the requested video(s), reviewing each video at least twice - once to determine if redaction and/or withholding are required pursuant to the exemptions enumerated under the Public Records Law and then making the necessary redactions to the BWC footage. If legal questions regarding content arise throughout the process these questions are brought to the attention of the Records Access Officer and/or an attorney in the Law Department. At a minimum, completion of the initial search, segregation, review, and redaction process outlined above requires 3 minutes of labor per one minute of footage, not including finalization of the record, and preparation of the written response. While the City expects to make redactions to the responsive records as required by law pursuant to Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law, please be advised that the City has submitted a fee petition to the Supervisor of Records seeking her permission to assess fees for redactions made pursuant to Exemptions (c) and (f). The lowest paid employee capable of completing your request makes in excess of $25.00 per hour. As required by law, the City has waived the first two hours of labor associated with your request. The estimated costs to fulfill your request have been calculated as set forth below: Fee Estimate- ≈ 184 minutes of body worn camera footage X 3 labor per minute of footage = 552 minutes (9.2 hours) ≈15 pages of reports X 2 minutes labor per page = 30 minutes (0.5 hours) -2 Free Hours as required by law. 7.7 hours X $25.00 dollars per hour= $192.50

Michael Manning SPR26/1022 Page 4 April 3, 2026 Reasonableness of the Fee Estimate In this case, where the City has explained that it will charge for segregation and redaction required by law and previously approved in a petition to this office, and has also explained the amount of time required, and confirmed that the lowest paid individual with the necessary skill is paid more than $25 per hour, I find the City has met its burden to explain how it has provided a reasonable fee estimate for the production of records responsive to this request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d) (a records access officer may assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record). Conclusion As set forth above, I find the City has met its burden in responding to the request at this time. Accordingly, I will consider this administrative appeal closed. If Hasmik Azizian is not satisfied with the resolution of this administrative appeal, please be advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(b)(ix), 10A(c) (pursuing administrative appeal does not limit availability of judicial remedies). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Hasmik Azizian