Commonwealth Transparency v. Mystic Valley Regional Charter School (SPR 20220633)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records March 31, 2022 SPR22/0633 Stephanie Solio Mystic Valley Regional Charter School 4 Laurel Street Malden, MA 02148 Dear Ms. Solio: I have received the petition of Commonwealth Transparency appealing the response of the Mystic Valley Regional Charter School (School) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On February 25, 2022, the requestor made two separate requests for the following: Any and all electronic mail which include: (1). Any person(s) who work for, contract for or in any other way officially represent Mystic Valley Regional Charter (District) AND (2). Any attorney representing the Mystic Valley Regional Charter (District) AND (3). [An identified individual]. Any email where (1), (2), and (3) from above appear in any of the address fields (To:, Cc:, and/or Bcc: ) regardless of any additional recipients are considered responsive. [1] Any and all electronic mail which include any person(s) representing Mystic Valley Regional Charter (District) and any person(s) from the Public Records Division of the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts including but not limited to the supervisor of public records. The records sought specifically include but are not limited to any communications sent or received by any attorney representing the Mystic Valley Regional Charter (District) and any person(s) from the Public Records Division of the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts including but not limited to the supervisor of public records. 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

Stephanie Solio SPR22/0633 Page 2 March 31, 2022 Previous appeals The above requests were the subject of previous appeals. See SPR22/0611 and SPR22/0614 Determinations of the Supervisor of Records (March 16, 2022). SPR22/0611 and SPR22/0614 were closed after this office was notified that the School had provided a response on March 15, 2022. Unsatisfied with the School’s response, the requestor petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR22/0633, 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 agency or municipality 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). 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. The School’s March 15th response In its March 15, 2022 response, the School asserts, “[a]s outlined in pending appeals for SPR 22/321; SPR 22/322; SPR 22/323, [the School] is not responding to requests from internet addresses with no human signatories. Interestingly, our reasons for such a stance were argued against vociferously by the petitioner in the above referenced two new appeals. A few days after an ‘Amicus Curiae’ brief appeared in reference to our pending appeals, the unsigned author decided to request material from the School. Until your office indicates that we must respond to digital ephemera, we shall not.” Identity or Status of Requestor Please note that the reason for which a requestor seeks access to or a copy of a public record does not afford any greater right of access to the requested information than other persons in the general public. The Public Records Law does not distinguish between requestors. Access to a record pursuant to the Public Records Law rests on the content of the record and not the

Stephanie Solio SPR22/0633 Page 3 March 31, 2022 circumstances of the requestor. Given this, the requestor may not be required to identify himself or herself as a condition of obtaining access to the requested records. See Bougas v. Chief of Police of Lexington, 371 Mass. 59, 64 (1976) (“the statute . . . extends the right to examine public records to ‘any person’ whether intimately involved with the subject matter of the records he seeks or merely motivated by idle curiosity”). Accordingly, requestor’s status will play no role in a determination as to whether the records should be disclosed or redacted under the Public Records Law. Conclusion Accordingly, the School is ordered to provide the requestor with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten (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. Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Commonwealth Transparency