Marion J. King v. Brookline, Town of - Public Schools (SPR 20220519)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records March 11, 2022 SPR22/0519; SPR22/0593 Suzanne McCormick-de Boer Records Access Officer Brookline Public Schools 333 Washington Street Brookline, MA 02445 Dear Ms. McCormick-de Boer: I have received the petitions of Marion King appealing the responses of the Brookline Public Schools (School) to requests for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On January 15, 2022, Ms. King requested, “Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Letter(s) of Finding for complaint PRS 5716, 5986, 6219, and 6228, redacted of any confidential information.” On January 16, 2022, Ms. King requested, “[Letters of Finding] for PRS 5244, 5245, 5249, 5251, and 5735.” The School responded to Ms. King’s January 15, 2022 request on January 27, 2022 by providing responsive records with redactions. The School responded to Ms. King’s January 16, 2022 request on January 31, 2022. Previous Appeal Ms. King’s January 16th request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR22/0369 Supervisor of Records Determination (February 25, 2022). There, I ordered the School to clarify whether it possesses records responsive to that request. The School provided responsive records with redactions on March 3, 2022. Unsatisfied with the substantive nature of both the January 15th and January 16th requests, respectively, Ms. King petitioned this office and these appeals, SPR22/0519 and SPR22/0593, were 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 agency or municipality 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

Suzanne McCormick-de Boer SPR22/0519; SPR22/0593 Page 2 March 11, 2022 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. The School’s January 27th and March 3rd Responses In the School’s initial response to Ms. King’s January 15th request and supplemental response to Ms. King’s January 16th request, the School provided responsive records with unspecified redactions. Current Appeals In both of Ms. King’s appeals, she contends that the redactions are improper and excessive. Burden of specificity in claiming exemptions The School’s responses did not contain the specificity required in a denial of access to public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv) (“the burden shall be upon the custodian to prove with specificity the exemption which applies”); see also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Police ------------------------- Comm’r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); Flatley, 419 Mass. at 511. Specifically, the School has not met its burden to show how the redacted portions fall within an exemption. It is also not clear from the School’s response, what type of information was redacted from the responsive records. As a result, I find the School did not satisfy its burden in responding to these records requests. The School is advised that a records custodian is required to not only cite an exemption, but to specifically explain the applicability of the exemption to the requested records in order to comply with the Public Records Law and its Regulations. Further, to deny access to a record under the Public Records Law, a records access officer must identify the record, categories of records, or portions of the record it intends to withhold. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3)(c)(4). Conclusion Accordingly, the School is ordered to provide Ms. King with a written response in accordance with the Public Records Law, its Regulations, and this order within ten business days. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of this response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Ms. King may appeal the substantive nature of the School’s response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1).

Suzanne McCormick-de Boer SPR22/0519; SPR22/0593 Page 3 March 11, 2022 Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Marion King