Chrissy Ryan v. Amherst-Pelham Regional School Districts (SPR 20191885)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts . William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records September 26, 2019 SPR19/1885 Debbie Westmoreland Amherst-Pelham Regional School District Town of Amherst 170 Chestnut Street Amherst, MA O1 002 Dear Ms. Westmoreland: I have received the petition of Chrissy Ryan appealing the response of the Amherst Pelham Regional School District (School) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 1O A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Ms. Ryan requested "Emails between Superintendent Mike Morris and Amherst School Committee Chair Anastasia Ordonez and emails between Superintendent Mike Morris and Town Manager Paul Bockelman and emails between Amherst Public Schools Finance Director Sean Mangano and Town Manager Paul Bockelman." The School provided responses indicating they would be charging a fee for redactions. Unsatisfied with the School's response, Ms. Ryan petitioned this office and SPRl 9/1885 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, § lOA(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, § lO(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. One Ashbmion Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832• Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre• pre@sec.state.ma.us

Debbie Westmoreland SPR19/1885 Page 2 September 26, 2019 Fee estimates A municipality 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, § lO(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, § lO(d)(i). Municipalities may not assess a fee for the first two hours of employee time to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce the record or records requested unless the municipality has 20,000 people or less. G. L. c. 66, § lO(d)(iii). Where appropriate, municipalities 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. However, municipalities may charge more than $25 per hour if such rate is approved by the Supervisor of Records under a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10( d)(iv). 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 under G. L. c. 66, § lO(d)(iv). See G. L. c. 66, § lO(d)(iii); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). The School's September 61 h Responses In the School's September 6th responses to Ms. Ryan, the School indicates the responsive records require "review for redaction of protected staff or student information." Ms. Ryan appeals challenging the need for such redactions. Burden of specificity in responding and claiming exemptions Pursuant to the Public Records Law, the burden shall be upon the records custodian to establish the applicability of an exemption. G. L. c. 66, § 1O (b )(iv) (written response must "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 ... "); see also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Police Comm'r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); Flatley, 419 Mass. at 511. Although the School indicates that the responsive records must be redacted for protected staff and student information, it is unclear which exemptions under the Public Records Law the School is claiming to redact such records or how the exemptions apply to redact the requested records. The School must provide a detailed response to specifically explain how the exemptions apply to withhold the requested records in compliance with the Public Records Law.

Debbie Westmoreland SPR19/1885 Page 3 September 26, 2019 Conclusion Accordingly, the School is ordered to provide Ms. Ryan with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within ten business days. 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, ~u~ Supervisor of Records · cc: Chrissy Ryan