← Back to Search
Dusty Christensen v. University of Massachusetts - Amherst (SPR 20201359)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 08-12-2020
ClosedAppealPetitioner Won
SPR 20201359 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Dusty Christensen concerning records held by University of Massachusetts - Amherst, opened 08-12-2020. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20201359
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- Initial
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Dusty Christensen
- Date Opened
- 08-12-2020
- Date Closed
- 08-26-2020
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records August 26, 2020 SPR20/1359 Christine M. Wilda Associate Chancellor for Compliance University of Massachusetts – Amherst 390 Whitmore Administration Building 181 President’s Drive Amherst, MA 01003 Dear Ms. Wilda: I have received the petition of Dusty Christensen of the Daily Hampshire Gazette appealing the response of the University of Massachusetts – Amherst (University) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Mr. Christensen requested “any forms disclosing potential academic conflicts of interest—such as a disclosure of financial interest form—filed by UMass Amherst employees from the beginning of 2018 to present.” Previous Appeals This request has been the subject of previous appeals. See SPR20/1111 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (July 21, 2020); SPR20/0334 (May 12, 2020); SPR19/2515 Supervisor of Records Determination (January 6, 2020); SPR20/0334 Supervisor of Records Determination (March 6, 2020). In my May 12th determination, after in camera review of responsive records, I found that the University had not met its burden to withhold the records, in their entirety, and ordered the University to provide a new response to Mr. Christensen. Current Appeal In his July 7, 2020 appeal petition, Mr. Christensen states that the University provided a response on June 11, 2020, including two responsive records. Mr. Christensen explains that in earlier correspondence, it appeared that he and the University had agreed that the scope of this request is coextensive with an earlier request filed by ProPublica, to which the University identified approximately 600 responsive records. In his August 11, 2020 appeal petition, Mr. Christensen indicates that the University continues to withhold disclosure of financial interest forms. 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 Christine M. Wilda SPR20/1359 Page 2 August 26, 2020 In a June 26, 2020 email to Mr. Christensen, the University states that “[a]fter review, the 600 documents mentioned in the prior correspondence were non-responsive to the request.” In an August 12, 2020 letter, the University states that “where there is no nexus between the faculty member’s publicly funded research and the disclosed personal financial interest, the forms have been withheld as either non-responsive to the request or pursuant to the exemptions.” The University argues that the information contained in these forms “do not give rise to actual or apparent conflicts of interest.” In support of its withholding the additional forms, the University additionally cites the privacy interest in nondisclosure of financial information held by University employees. The University also indicates that some of the identified forms were created prior to 2018. Based on the University’s responses, it is unclear why it continues to withhold additional financial disclosure forms. As noted above, in my May 12th determination, upon in camera review I found that the University had not met its burden under Exemption (c) to withhold the records. Therefore, I find that the University must produce the records with the time frame requested by Mr. Christensen. Conclusion Accordingly, the University is ordered to review the records, redact where necessary, and provide Mr. Christensen with the remaining records, in a manner consistent with this and prior orders, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations without delay. 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: Dusty Christensen