Kevin Wood v. Georgetown, Town of - Public Schools (SPR 20190606)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords April 3, 2019 SPR19/0606 Carol C. Jacobs Superintendent Georgetown Public Schools 8 Pine Plain Road Georgetown, MA 01833 Dear Ms. Jacobs: I have received the petition from Kevin Wood appealing the response from the Georgetown Public Schools (School) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 1O A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, on December 14, 2018, Mr. Wood requested the following records: 1. Emails and email attachments to or from the Georgetown School Committee ... with any Georgetown School Department employee between the dates of October 14, 2018 and December 17, 2018 whether or not such communications passed through the Georgetown School Department email system. 2. Any correspondence with or about Kieve Wavus [Camp Kieve] between the dates of January 2016 and December 17, 2018. 3. Any correspondence with or about Trad Leadership Group, LLC, Core Trainings, Dana Hult, Deb Hult between the dates of January 2016 and December 17, 2018. 4. School Committee policy for establishing qualifications and scope of work for outside entities not paid by the Georgetown School Department but providing services to the school department and/or students. Previous appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal, SPRl 9/0227 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (February 19, 2019). In my February 19th determination I ordered the School to "confirm whether it possesses any additional responsive records, including email attachments, referenced in Mr. Wood's appeal." If the School were to possess any additional responsive records, the School was ordered to provide them in a manner consistent with the Public Records Law. 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

Carol C. Jacobs SPR19/0606 Page2 April 3, 2019 Following the February 19th determination, the School provided a response on February 25, 2019 in which it indicated it "provided all records requested by Mr. Wood as of Wednesday, February 6, 2019." Unsatisfied with the School's response, Mr. Wood petitioned this office and this appeal, SPRI 9/0606, was opened as a result. 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, § IOA(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, § 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, § IO(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (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. Current Appeal The School's February 25th response states "the District provided Mr. Wood with specific information about how each area of the search was conducted. He was informed that the only documents that were exempt were those that identified specific students in accordance with student records law and/or those that fall into the category of attorney/client privilege." Additionally the School provides "we have provided Mr. Wood with the documents that he requested ... and can confirm that we do not have 'any additional responsive records, including email attachments.'" Mr. Woods states "[t]he production contained no specific claim of exemption other than as stated above. Regarding records claimed to be exempt due to attorney client privilege: the records officer has not provided a 'detailed description of those records, including the names of the author and recipients, and in general terms, the subject matter of the witheld information.' [See 950CMR 32.06(3)(d)]." Further, Mr. Woods claims "[t]he document production also contained various hard copy of school committee correspondence on the subject matters of approximately fifty [50] pages. The production contained a broad spectrum of content. A significant portion was not related to my request." Burden of specificity; segregable portions The School's February 6th response to Mr. Woods merely states: "[p]lease be advised that we have not provided documents that contain student names according to student regulations

Carol C. Jacobs SPR19/0606 Page 3 April 3, 2019 {603 CMR 23.07 and 34 C.F.R.s. 99) and documents that are protected by attorney client privilege." The School did not identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that it intends to withhold from disclosure or claim exemptions with specificity. G. L. c. 66, § lO(b)(iv) (written response must "identify any records, categories ofrecords 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 ..." ); see also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Police Comm'r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); Flatley, 419 Mass. at 511. As a result, the School has not met its burden to withhold full documents responsive to the request. See G. L. c. 66, § lO(a) (any non-exempt, segregable portion of a public record is subject to mandatory disclosure). Conclusion For the reasons discussed above, the School is ordered to provide Mr. Wood with a response, in accordance with the provisions of the Public Records Law within ten business days. If the School maintains that any records or portion of the responsive records is exempt from disclosure, it must provide Mr. Wood with a written explanation, with specificity, how a particular exemption applies to the record. A copy of any 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. Sincerely, ~ Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Kevin Wood