Sharkey, Kyle v. Canton, Town of - Town Clerk (SPR 20261151)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 7, 2026 SPR26/1151 Tracy Kenney Town Clerk Town of Canton 801 Washington Street, 1st Floor Canton, MA 02021 Dear Ms. Kenney: I have received the petition of Kyle Sharkey appealing the response of the Town of Canton (Town) to several requests for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On March 11, 2026 and March 13, 2026, Mr. Sharkey requested the following records: [1] Email correspondence between [an identified individual] and the Canton Police Department from January 1, 2021, to January 29, 2022, and January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2021. [2] Email Records [an identified individual]… Email Records to or from [an identified individual] from February 4, 2022 through February 9, 2022. [3] [An identified individual] Email Records to or from [an identified individual] from February 3, 2022 through February 9, 2022. [4] [An identified individual] email records (sent and/or received) on February 4, 2022 through February 9, 2022. [5] [An identified individual] email records (sent and/or received) on February 4, 2022 through February 9, 2022. [6] [An identified individual] email records (sent and/or received) on February 4, 2022 through February 9, 2022. [7] [An identified individual;] email records (sent and/or received) on February 4, 2022 through February 9, 2022. 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

Tracy Kenney SPR26/1151 Page 2 April 7, 2026 [8] [An identified individual] email records (sent and/or received) on February 4, 2022 through February 9, 2022. [9] [An identified individual] email records (sent and/or received) on February 4, 2022 through February 9, 2022. The Town responded on March 25, 2026. Unsatisfied with the Town’s response, Mr. Sharkey petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/1151, 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 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).

Tracy Kenney SPR26/1151 Page 3 April 7, 2026 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). The Town’s March 25th Response In its March 25, 2026 response, the Town stated: …the law requires that a public records request reasonably describe the public record(s) sought, so that the request is sufficient to enable a professional employee who is familiar with the subject area of the request to locate the record(s) with a reasonable amount of effort… Your request for email records to or from “the Canton Police Department” is not sufficiently specific as it does not articulate which email accounts you are seeking records… In addition, the Town assessed a fee of $3,325.00 to produce the remaining records responsive to the requests. In support of its fee estimate, the Town provided the following information: As to the remainder of your requests seeking email records as detailed above, a fee will be assessed for the costs for the time associated with searching for, compiling, segregating, reproducing and redacting the requested records as required by law. See G.L. c. 66 §10(d)(iii). The Town’s preliminary analysis had determined that there are over 1,600 emails responsive to your request. The Town estimates that it will take, at a minimum, one hundred thirty-five (135) hours to search for, compile, segregate, reproduce and redact the requested records as required by law, inclusive of the time already dedicated to searching for and compiling the requested records. As the Town is a municipality with a population in excess of twenty thousand (20,000) people, a fee will not be imposed for the first two (2) hours dedicated to your request. Based on the Town’s good faith estimate, a fee of three thousand three hundred twenty-five ($3,325.00) dollars will be required which is based on an estimated one hundred thirty-three (133) hours at $25.00 an hour to complete your request(s). Please be advised that the actual cost and fee of producing the records may vary upon preparation of such record(s). The Town will provide you with any and all public records responsive to this request within fifteen (15) business days from receipt of the above referenced estimated fee payment which may be submitted to the Town Clerk’s Office. Please note portions of the responsive records may be redacted and/or withheld pursuant to attorney-client privilege, G.L. c. 4, § 7(26) and/or as required by law.

Tracy Kenney SPR26/1151 Page 4 April 7, 2026 Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Sharkey requested a fee waiver and argued that his request for email records to or from “the Canton Police Department” is reasonably specific. Reasonable Description of Records Sought Please be advised that in Friedman v. Div. of Admin. Law Appeal and Bureau of Special Educ. Appeals, the Suffolk Superior Court, in its Memorandum of Decision and Order on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, stated: [The requester] has a right to seek public records from his government, provided he does so in a reasonable manner. [The agencies], in turn, have a right not to be inundated with drain-the-ocean records requests, provided they fulfill the basic expectations of the [Public Records Law] in a fair and transparent manner. See Friedman v. Div. of Admin. Law Appeal and Bureau of Special Educ. Appeals, Suffolk Sup. No. 2284CV02061-C, at 3 (February 14, 2023). The Superior court has also found that under the Public Records Law “[t]he reasonable description requirement contemplates that a requesting party will identify documents or categories of documents with sufficient particularity that government employees will be able to understand exactly what they are looking for, and then make a prompt production.” See Jaideep Chawla v. Dept. of Revenue, Suffolk. Sup. No. l 784CV02087, at 2 (January 23, 2019). In its response, the Town is seeking clarification regarding the specific email accounts sought in the portion of the request seeking email records to or from “the Canton Police Department.” In accordance with the Public Records Law, custodians are expected to use their superior knowledge of the records in their custody to assist requestors in obtaining the desired information. See 950 C.M.R. 32.04(5). The duty to comply with requests for records extends to those records that exist and are in the possession, custody, or control of the custodian of records at the time of the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(ii), (b)(ii). Accordingly, this office encourages Mr. Sharkey and the Town to communicate to facilitate providing records more efficiently and affordably. Mr. Sharkey may wish to clarify this portion of the 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). Fee Waivers G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(v) provides the following with respect to waiving a fee for the production of responsive records:

Tracy Kenney SPR26/1151 Page 5 April 7, 2026 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). Reasonableness of the Fee Estimate Although the Town states that it would take 135 hours to produce the remaining responsive records, it is unclear why the Town requires this much time. The Town must advise how much time is needed to search and how much time is needed to segregate and/or redact under the law. Additionally, if redactions are required, I find the Town 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, although the Town has identified 1,600 emails responsive to the requests, it is uncertain how many pages of responsive records exist and how many minutes per page the Town requires to segregate or redact the records. Accordingly, the Town must provide further details regarding its fee estimate. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv) (requiring the amount of the fee be reasonable). 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). Consequently, the Town must also clarify whether its fee estimate includes time for segregation or redaction not required by law. For the reasons discussed above, I find the Town must revise its fee estimate or provide further explanation of how the fee estimate of $3,325.00 is consistent with G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). This office encourages Mr. Sharkey and the Town to communicate to facilitate providing records more efficiently and affordably. Mr. Sharkey may wish to narrow the request(s). 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(s) would result in the requirement to issue a revised fee estimate.

Tracy Kenney SPR26/1151 Page 6 April 7, 2026 Conclusion Accordingly, the Town is ordered to provide Mr. Sharkey with a response to the request(s), provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten (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. Mr. Sharkey may appeal the substantive nature of the Town’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Kyle Sharkey