The Complainant challenges the City response that responsive e-mails were "overly redacted" and/or not provided. Of the 68 e-mails that were provided in a redacted manner, 63 of these e-mails were in the Complainant's possession prior to making the instant APRA request. Accordingly, it was unnecessary for us to determine whether the City violate the APRA when it provided redacted e-mails. See Farinelli v. City of Pawtucket, PR 16-27. Having reviewed the remaining e-mails in camera, we determined that these e-mails were exempt under the APRA and/or otherwise within the Complainant's possession prior to making the instant APRA request.
