Terese Dillingham v. Massachusetts School Building Authority (SPR 20171581)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords November 14, 2017 SPR17/1581 Brian P. Kelley, Esq. Associate General Counsel Massachusetts School Building Authority 40 Broad Street, Suite 500 Boston, MA 02109 Dear Attorney Kelley: I have received your petition on behalf of the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) seeking an extension of time to furnish copies of a requested record, or any portion thereof. G. L. c. 66, § lO(c). As required by law, the School furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor. lg. In a request dated October 24, 2017, Terese Dillingham requested "a copy of any and all documents and communications created or received" by certain individuals or entities "concerning Lowell High School(Lowell, MA) during the period from October 24, 2016 to the present." Petitions for an extension oft ime 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 day~.-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 6r as part of a series of requests from the sanie 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

BrianP. Kelley, Esq. SPRl 7/1581 Page 2 November 14, 2017 G. L. c. 66, § lO(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, t.he 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) shall provide an initial response to a requester within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 36.06(4)(b). Current petition In the MSBA's petition dated November 7, 2017, you explain that "[a]n initial search of the MSBA email server retrieved approximately 7,000 emails that may fit within the scope of the Requests. The MSBA Records Access Officer ("RAO") is required to read each email and determine whether the email fits within the scope of the Requests and whether the email is exempt from disclosure pursuant to M.G.L. ch. 4, § 7." You also explain that responsive records will need to be retrieved from various departments within the MSBA. You explain that"[o ]n November 2, 2017 the MSBA contacted Ms. Dillingham and explained the breadth of the Requests, The MSBA asked for a reasonable modification of the scope of the Requests to enable the MSBA to produce the records more efficiently and affordably." I understand the MSBA provided a fee estimate to Ms. Dillingham on November 6, 2017, in which you explained "[p]lease contact me if you want to discuss a reasonable modification to the scope of your request to enable the MSBA to produce the records at a lower cost. Also, you may visit the MSBA office to view the project folder and point out which documents you are interested in receiving." In an email dated November 13, 2017, you indicate that "Ms. Dillingham has agreed to an extension of time and modified the scope of her public records request. I will provide her with a revised fee estimate this week." Conclusion Accordingly, I find that in light of the MSBA's previous responses and its November 13th email, it is unnecessary to opine on the MSBA's petition at this time. See G.L. c. 66, § 1O (b )(vii) ( a records access officer must provide a written response within ten business days and may "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 agency or municipality to produce records sought more efficiently and affordably").

Brian P. Kelley, Esq. SPR17/1581 Page 3 November 14, 2017 The MSBA must provide a response in a manner consistent with the Public Records Law and its Regulations. Ms. Dillingham may appeal the substantive nature of the response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). · Sincerely, ~~ Supervisor of Records cc: Terese Dillingham