Alyssa Anderson v. Boston, City of - Public Schools (SPR 20210408)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records March 4, 2021 SPR21/0408 Shawn A. Williams, Esq. Director of Public Records Records Access Officer City of Boston One City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney Williams: I have received the petition of Alyssa Anderson appealing the response of the City of Boston Public Schools (City) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On January 6, 2021, Ms. Anderson requested the following records: “…copies of all emails including 1 or more of the following 3 search terms [for named individuals] or [unnamed individual], or 430818 from February 25, 2019 forward that are to or from [numerous emails ending in bostonpublicshools.org] …” Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR21/0236 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (February 16, 2021). The City responded on February 18, 2021. Unsatisfied with the response, Ms. Anderson appealed and SPR21/0408 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. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). 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

Shawn A. Williams, Esq. SPR21/0408 Page 2 March 4, 2021 The City’s February 18th Response In its February 18th response, the City produced records with redactions pursuant to Exemption (d) of the Public Records Law. The City asserted, “… after a review of each email, BPS has determined that the emails are such that they must be redacted in their entirety (except for sender and recipient information) in order to protect such policy deliberations.” In camera inspection In order to facilitate a determination as to the applicability of the City’s claims to redact the records, the City must provide this office with a representative sample of an un-redacted copy of the responsive records for in camera inspection. After I complete my review of the documents, I will return the records to your custody and issue an opinion on the public or exempt nature of the record, See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(4). The authority to require the submission of records for an in camera inspection emanates from the Code of Massachusetts Regulations, 950 C.M.R. 32.08(4); see also G.L. c. 66, § 1. This office interprets the in camera inspection process to be analogous to that utilized by the judicial system. See Rock v. Massachusetts Comm'n Against Discrimination, 384 Mass. 198, 206 (1981) (administrative agency entitled deference in the interpretation of its own regulations). Records are not voluntarily submitted, but rather are submitted pursuant to an order by this office that an in camera inspection is necessary to make a proper finding. Records are submitted for the limited purpose of review. This office is not the custodian of records examined in camera, therefore, any request made to this office for records being reviewed in camera will be denied. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(4)(c). This office has a long history of cooperation with governmental agencies with respect to in camera inspection. Custodians submit copies of the relevant records to this office upon a promise of confidentiality. This office does not release records reviewed in camera to anyone under any circumstances. Upon a determination of the public record status, records reviewed in camera are promptly returned to the custodian. To operate in any other fashion would seriously impede our ability to function and would certainly affect our credibility within the legal community. Please be aware, any cover letter submitted to accompany the relevant records may be subject to disclosure. Order Accordingly, the City is ordered to provide this office with a representative sample of an un-redacted copy of the responsive records for in camera inspection without delay.

Shawn A. Williams, Esq. SPR21/0408 Page 3 March 4, 2021 Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Alyssa Anderson