Law Office, Snook v. Southborough, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20261535)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 29, 2026 SPR26/1535 Sean P. McCarthy Southborough Police Department 32 Cordaville Road Southborough, MA 01772 Dear Mr. McCarthy: On April 23, 2026, this office received your petition on behalf of the Southborough Police Department (Department) seeking a waiver of statutory limits on fees that may be assessed in responding to a public records request and 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 Department furnished a copy of the petition to the requestor, Snook Law Office (“requestor”). G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L.c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On April 20, 2026, the requestor sought, “all Motor Vehicle Crash reports concerning any motor vehicle accidents which occurred in your jurisdiction from April 12, 2026, to April 18, 2026.” 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 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 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

Sean P. McCarthy SPR26/1535 Page 2 April 29, 2026 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). Petition to Assess Fees In its petition, the Department requests “permission to charge the following fees associated with the segregation and redaction of the requested records.” In support of its petition, the Department provides the following information: However, we will be required to make certain redactions to those records in accordance with the Public Records Law. Exemption (c): This exemption applies to “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; provided, however, that this subclause shall not apply to records related to a law enforcement misconduct investigation.” The records requested contain information which must be redacted from the records pursuant to this exemption. The records requested contain information

Sean P. McCarthy SPR26/1535 Page 3 April 29, 2026 which, if disclosed, would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Such information contains intimate details and the privacy interests involved outweigh the public interests in the disclosure of that information. In making that determination, the department has considered the following factors: (1) whether disclosure would result in personal embarrassment to an individual of normal sensibilities; (2) whether the materials sought contain intimate details of a highly personal nature; and (3) whether the same information is available from other sources. See People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) v. Department of Agricultural Resources, 477 Mass. 280, 292 (2017). To make these redactions, we are required to devote more than 2 hours of time to search for, compile, segregate, redact and/or reproduce the requested records. In light of the Department’s petition, I find that the Department 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). To the extent the responsive records contain the exempt information as described above, the Department may assess a fee for the segregation and redaction of such exempt material. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). Fee in Excess of $25.00 per Hour In its petition, the Department argues that the requests are made for a commercial purpose, and provides the following information to assess a fee of $35.00 per hour: The lowest paid employee who has the necessary skill to complete the segregation and redaction is Stephanie Fontaine, whose normal hourly rate is $35.00 per hour. This request could not prudently be completed by any employee earning at or below $25.00 per hour because Stephanie Fontaine is the lowest paid employee in the Department who holds the dual qualifications necessary to fulfill this request: (1) she is a trained and certified Records Access Officer (RAO), and (2) she has authorized access to the Department’s crash report system. No other employee at or below the $25.00 per hour threshold possesses both the required RAO certification and the system access necessary to locate, compile, segregate, and redact the responsive crash reports. Therefore, the fee more than $25.00 per hour is necessary and not merely a preference, as the request could not have been prudently completed without utilizing Ms. Fontaine’s services. It is in my experience that public records requests for all accident reports within a given period, rather than for a specific client’s name and date of accident, are being made for commercial purposes. If the requester were seeking a report for a specific client, there would be no need to request all reports for an entire week’s period. The pattern of requests submitted by Snook Law Office further confirms this conclusion. Specifically, Snook Law Office has submitted four consecutive weekly requests

Sean P. McCarthy SPR26/1535 Page 4 April 29, 2026 for all motor vehicle crash reports occurring within the Southborough Police Department’s jurisdiction, as follows: • March 30, 2026 — requesting all crash reports from March 22, 2026, to March 28, 2026 • April 6, 2026 — requesting all crash reports from March 29, 2026, to April 4, 2026 • April 13, 2026 — requesting all crash reports from April 5, 2026, to April 11, 2026 • April 20, 2026 — requesting all crash reports from April 12, 2026, to April 18, 2026 Each of the first three requests was approved by the Supervisor of Records for fees at $25.00 per hour for 2 hours, totaling $50.00 per request, for a combined approved fee of $150.00. As of the date of this petition, Snook Law Office has not paid any of the approved fees associated with those prior requests. Despite the outstanding balance of $150.00 in unpaid fees, Snook Law Office has continued to submit additional weekly requests for the same category of records, further evidencing that this is an ongoing, systematic effort to obtain accident victim information for the purpose of expanding the firm’s client base — a plainly commercial purpose. The regularity, and volume of these requests, combined with the non-payment of previously approved fees, is consistent with a law office harvesting accident data for commercial solicitation rather than conducting a targeted inquiry on behalf of a specific existing client. Please be advised that the term “commercial purpose” as used in the Public Records Law shall mean: the sale or resale of any portion of the public record or the use of information from the public record to advance the requester’s strategic business interests in a manner that the requester can reasonably expect to make a profit, and shall not include gathering or reporting news or gathering information to promote citizen oversight or further the understanding of the operation or activities of government or for academic, scientific, journalistic or public research or education. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(ix). Based on the information provided in the City’s petition, it is my understanding that the request made by the requestor meets the statutory definition of “commercial purpose” within the Public Records Law. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(ix); see also SPR20/2599 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (January 5, 2021). Based on the City’s petition and my finding that the requests are for a commercial purpose, I approve the City’s petition to assess a fee of $35.00 per hour.

Sean P. McCarthy SPR26/1535 Page 5 April 29, 2026 Conclusion Accordingly, to the extent the responsive records contain the exempt information as described above, the Department may assess a fee for segregation and redaction. Additionally, where the request is for a commercial purpose, the Department may assess a fee limited to $35.00 per hour. 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). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Snook Law Office