Houghton, Sam v. Cape Cod Community College (SPR 20261551)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 30, 2026 SPR26/1551 Patrick Stone Records Access Officer Cape Cod Community College 2240 Iyannough Road Barnstable, MA 02668-1599 Dear Mr. Stone: On April 24, 2026, this office received your petition on behalf of the Cape Cod Community College (College) seeking an extension of time to produce records and 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 College furnished a copy of the petition to the requestor, Sam Houghton. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L.c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On April 13, 2026, Mr. Houghton requested, “[a]ny and all documents related to an investigation into [identified individual] over a complaint that he potentially violated the college’s Policy on Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity, and Diversity.” 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 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

Patrick Stone SPR26/1551 Page 2 April 30, 2026 (vi) the public interest served by expeditious disclosure. 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 College requests “an extension of twenty (20) business days…” In support of its request the College provides the following information: . . . Thus, for any or all of the reasons outlined above, the College does not have the capacity to fully identify and review documents responsive to the request, determine all applicable exemptions, and produce the requested documents by the tenth (10th) business day following its receipt as required by the law. In light of the need to collect and examine the records, and the capacity of the College to produce the records without an extension, the College has established good cause to permit an extension of time. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c)(i)-(iii). The College is granted an extension of 20 business days. Petition to Assess Fees – Agencies 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 (Supervisor) 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). 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 an agency’s petition to allow the agency 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

Patrick Stone SPR26/1551 Page 3 April 30, 2026 purpose. The second prong of the test is whether the fee represents an actual and good faith representation by the agency 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; 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. Petitions seeking a waiver of statutory limits to fees assessed to segregate and/or redact public records must be made within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(g). Fee Estimates – Agencies An agency 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). Agencies may not assess a fee for the first four (4) hours of employee time to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce the record or records requested. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(ii). Where appropriate, agencies 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. Current Petition In its petition, the College requests “approval to charge for the segregation and redaction of potentially responsive records…” In support of its petition, the College provides the following information: Mr. Houghton’s public records request could result in a voluminous number of records, some of which may be subject to exemptions pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 4, section 7(26) including but not limited to (a), (c), and (f), open meeting law, and the attorney client-privilege. The nature of the records requested, which includes “any and all” documents related to an investigation into [identified individual] over a complaint that he potentially violated the college’s Policy on Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity, and Diversity, requires that each record be carefully reviewed to ensure that production of documentation is lawful. The compilation, review, segregation and anticipated redaction of said documents which could total in the hundreds if not thousands of pages, will require the engagement of several key confidential administrators as well as the College’s Board Chair and General Counsel who, where appropriate, will also

Patrick Stone SPR26/1551 Page 4 April 30, 2026 need to create a privilege log. In light of the College’s petition, I find the College 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 College may assess a fee for the segregation and redaction of such exempt material. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). Conclusion Accordingly, I find that the College has established good cause for a time extension of 20 business days as described above. Additionally, to the extent the responsive records contain the exempt information as described above, the College may assess a fee for segregation and redaction. I encourage the parties to communicate further to enable the College to provide records in an efficient and affordable manner. Please note, Mr. Houghton 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: Sam Houghton