Mangini, Laura v. Wilbraham, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20261090)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records March 31, 2026 SPR26/1090 Chief Edward Lennon Police Chief Wilbraham Police Department 2780 Boston Road Wilbraham, MA 01095 Dear Mr. Lennon: On March 25, 2026, this office received your petition on behalf of the Wilbraham Police Department (Department) seeking an extension of time to produce records and a waiver of statutory limits on fees that may be assessed in responding to a public records request. 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 Department furnished a copy of the petition to the requestor, Laura D. Mangini, Esq. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L.c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On March 6, 2026, Attorney Mangini requested thirty-seven police reports. Petition for an Extension of Time Under the Public Records Law, upon a showing of good cause, the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) may grant a single extension to an agency not to exceed 20 business days and a single extension to a municipality not to exceed 30 business days. In determining whether there has been a showing of good cause, the Supervisor shall consider, but shall not be limited to considering: (i) the need to search for, collect, segregate or examine records; (ii) the scope of redaction required to prevent unlawful disclosure; (iii) the capacity or the normal business hours of operation of the agency or municipality to produce the request without the extension; (iv) efforts undertaken by the agency or municipality in fulfilling the current request and previous requests; (v) whether the request, either individually or as part of a series of requests from the same requestor, is frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality; and (vi) the public interest served by expeditious disclosure. 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

Chief Edward Lennon SPR26/1090 Page 2 March 31, 2026 G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). If the Supervisor determines that the request is part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass, and the requests are not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, the Supervisor may grant a longer extension or relieve the agency or municipality of its obligation to provide copies of the records sought. Id. The filing of a petition does not affect the requirement that a Records Access Officer (RAO) must provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 36.06(4)(b). Request for Additional Time to Produce Records In its petition, the Department requests “an extension of thirty days” In support of its request the Department provides the following information: The Town of Wilbraham has approximately 15,000 residents. The police department has one administrative staff member who handles basic public record requests in addition to handling records, payroll, accounting, administrative logistics, and acts as the administrative assistant to the chief of police. Complex public record requests are handled by the chief of police or a police captain. The attached list of requested records includes multiple reports involving domestic assaults, sexual assault related incidents, and arrest/ CORI records. Due to the specific nature of the location almost all of the reports will include juvenile information. The time needed to complete a request of this volume is significant. The complexity of large portions of this request will be beyond that of the staff member who handles general public record requests. The labor involved in this burdensome request will be significant due to the extent of the redaction necessary in order that the responses are compliant with the public records laws. In light of the need to collect and examine the records, and the capacity of the Town to produce the records without an extension, the Town has established good cause to permit an extension of time. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c)(i)-(iii). The Town is granted an extension of 30 business days. 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

Chief Edward Lennon SPR26/1090 Page 3 March 31, 2026 public interest served by limiting the cost of public access to the records; b) the financial ability 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 The Department submitted its petition on March 25, 2026, more than ten business days after receipt of the request. In light of the fact that the Department has not demonstrated it submitted a timely petition, permission to waive statutory limits on fees cannot be granted. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(g).

Chief Edward Lennon SPR26/1090 Page 4 March 31, 2026 Conclusion Accordingly, I find that the Department has established good cause for a time extension of 30 business days as described above. However, in light of the fact that the Department has not demonstrated it submitted a timely petition, a waiver of statutory limits on fees cannot be granted. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(g). Please note, Attorney Mangini 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). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Laura D. Mangini, Esq.