Eoin Higgins v. University of Massachusetts - Amherst (SPR 20202432)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records December 22, 2020 SPR20/2432 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 Eoin Higgins 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, on November 23, 2020, Mr. Higgins requested “an opportunity to inspect or obtain copies of public records, specifically all emails and attachments from July 22, 2019 to September 8, 2020 from Andrew Abramson and Tim Ennis having to do with the CD-1 race, Holyoke Mayor Alex Morse, Rep. Richard Neal, and the local, state, college, and national Democratic Party in their capacities as members of the UMass College Democrats and within UMass student government. This includes, but is not limited to, any and all emails and attachments from the personal college emails of Andrew Abramson and Tim Ennis and the email addresses sgaregistry@umass.edu and sgapolicy@umsass.edu pertaining to, from, or addressed to…” thirteen (13) identified custodians. The University provided a response on December 8, 2020. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Higgins appealed and this appeal, SPR20/2432, 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, § 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, § 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, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. 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 SPR20/2432 Page 2 December 22, 2020 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. The University’s December 8th response In its December 8th response, the University states “[t]his request is very broad and lacks specificity. As written, it is very difficult to determine how to perform a search for the records you are seeking. Therefore, in order to expedite this request, please provide specific email accounts and key words to perform a search on.” In his appeal, Mr. Higgins indicates “[t]he college claims it needs email addresses, the request gives two addresses and the names of students for their college emails. The college asks for key words, key words were provided.” Based on the University’s response, it has not met its burden in responding to the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b). Please be advised, the University shall 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 University to produce records sought more efficiently and affordably. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vii). Order Accordingly, the University is ordered to provide Mr. Higgins with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within 10 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. Mr. Higgins may appeal the substantive nature of the University’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Eoin Higgins