Gail Paddock v. Hampshire Regional School District (SPR 20180170)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Calvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supewwor of Records February 22,201 8 SPR181170 Dr. Craig Jurgensen Superintendent of Schools Hampshire Regional School District 19 Stage Road Westhampton, MA 0 1027 Dear Dr. Jurgenson: I have received the petition of Gail Paddock appealing the response of the Hampshire Regional School District (School) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, 5 IOA; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Ms. Paddock originally requested "a list of professional development credits earned by the Principal of Williainsburg Elementary School." On February 2,2018 , the School sent a response letter and cited Exemption (c) as reasons for withholding records. Ms. Paddock acknowledges in the response "the Superintendent provided a copy of the Principal's license and an assertion that she has talten the appropriate number of professional development credits to maintain her license." Ms. Paddock appealed, requesting that the School "provide a list of the particular credits obtained" by the Principal of Williamsburg Elementary School. 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, 5 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 town of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L, c. 4, 5 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, 5 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 4 19 Mass. 507, 5 1 1 (1 995) (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. G. L. c. 66, 5 1O (b)(iv). One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massach.u setts 02108 (617) 727-2832. Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre pre@sec.state.ma.us

Dr. Craig Jurgensen Page 2 February 22,201 8 If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L, c. 66, 5 lO(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. Exemption (c) The Division claims the records may be withheld under the first clause of Exemption (c) of the Public Records Law. Exemption (c) permits the withholding of: personnel and medical files or information; also any other materials or data relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. G. L. c. 4, 5 7(26)(c). Exemption (c) contains two distinct and independent clauses, each requiring its own analysis. Globe Newspaper Co. v. Boston Retirement Bd., 388 Mass. 427, 432-33 (1983). The first clause, relevant to this appeal, creates a categorical exemption for personnel information that relates to an identifiable individual and is of a "personal nature." Id, at 434. Massachusetts courts have found that "core categories of personnel information that are 'useful in making employment decisions regarding an employee"' may be withheld from disclosure. Worcester Telegram & Gazette Corp. v. Chief of Police of Worcester, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 1, 5 (2003). For example, "employment applications, employee work evaluations, disciplinary documentation, and promotion, demotion, or termination information pertaining to a particular employee," may be withheld pursuant to the first clause of Exemption (c). Wakefield Teachers Ass'n v. School .C omm , 431 Mass. 792,798 (2000). Appeal The School has not clarified whether the requested records are currently in their possession. 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, 5 lO(a)(ii), (b)(ii). Further, if the School is not in possession of the requested records, it has the duty to identify the agency or municipality that may be in possession, custody, or control of the public record sought, if lcnown. See G. L, c. 66, 3 10(b) (iii). The School also references Exemption (c) for the withholding of records. Despite the School's reference to Exemption (c), it is unclear which of these apply to each redaction or withheld record. See G. L. c. 66, 5 lO(b)(iv) (a written response shall "identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based .. . . "); Flatlev, 4 19 Mass. at 5 11 (custodian has

Dr. Craig Jurgensen Page 3 February 22,20 18 the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). In order to determine whether the withheld information properly falls under the exemptions cited, the School must specify which exemption applies to each redaction or withheld record. Conclusion Accordingly, the School is ordered to produce any responsive records in its possession in a manner consistent with this determination, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within ten business days, A copy of such response must be provided to this office. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of this response to this office at pre@,sec.state.ma.us. Ms. Paddock may appeal the substantive nature of the revised response within ninety days. 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, v Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Gail Paddock