Malden Transparency v. Easthampton, City of - Public Schools (SPR 20213223)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records December 14, 2021 SPR21/3223 Sarah Mochak Director of Special Education Easthampton Public Schools 50 Payson Avenue Easthampton, MA 01027 Dear Director Mochak: I have received the petition of Malden Transparency appealing the response of the Easthampton Public Schools (School) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On September 26, 2021, the requestor sought the following: For the time period January 1, 2019 through the date [the School] respond[s] with the responsive documents . . . 1. All billing statements and/or invoices from [a named law firm]. 2. All documents evidencing payments made to [a named law firm]. Previous petition; appeal This request was the subject of a previous petition from the School and subsequent appeal. See SPR21/2558 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (October 12, 2021) and SPR21/2561 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (October 19, 2021). In my October 19th determination, I found that the School had met its burden in responding to the request, in regards to its fee estimate. On December 10, 2021, the School provided a response, including responsive records. Unsatisfied with the School’s response, the requestor petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR21/3223, 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). 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

Sarah Mochak SPR21/3223 Page 2 December 14, 2021 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). 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. If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. Current appeal In its December 10, 2021 response, the School indicated that “[t]he Office of District Counsel spent .8 hours segregating and redacting the responsive records. As a result, the District provides a refund of $162.50, reflecting that the District overestimated the time it would take to segregate and redact the responsive records by 3.36 hours. . . . In order to issue a refund, please provide the district with a W9 form.” In the appeal petition, the requestor states “[t]he RAO/District is requiring that a W9 be provided to return the funds which [the requestor] paid, and were completely unnecessary. Wherefore [the requestor] implores the SPR to find and Order that the RAO/District return the unused funds directly to the payor without delay, and without encumbrance or strings attached.” Conclusion In compliance with the Public Records Law, the Supervisor of Records may only issue determinations where a violation of G. L. c. 66, § 10 has occurred. G. L. c. 66, § 10A(a). Given that no violation of G. L. c. 66, § 10 has been asserted by the requestor in the appeal petition, I am unable to issue a determination at this time. If the requestor is not satisfied with the resolution of this administrative appeal, please be advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth. See G. L. c. 66, § l0A(c). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Malden Transparency