Karin Sutter v. Natick Public Schools (SPR 20231657)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records July 26, 2023 SPR23/1657 Timothy Luff Deputy Superintendent Natick Public Schools 13 East Central Street Natick, MA 01760 Dear Deputy Superintendent Luff: I have received the petition of Karin Sutter appealing the response of the Natick Public Schools (School) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On June 13, 2023, Ms. Sutter requested, “…all electronic communications from and to every member of the Natick School [C]ommittee and [A]dministration on June 12, 2023 between the hours of 6:30 [PM] and 9:30 [PM].” Prior appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR23/1523 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (July 14, 2023). I closed the appeal after I learned that the School provided Ms. Sutter with responses on June 23, 2023 and July 3, 2023. Unsatisfied with the School’s responses, Ms. Sutter petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR23/1657, 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) (written response must “identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends 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

Timothy Luff, Deputy Superintendent SPR23/1657 Page 2 July 26, 2023 to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based…”); 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). The School’s June 23rd and July 3rd responses A review of the School’s production of the records did not include a written response that indicates the Public Records Law exemption that allows the School to redact the records. Subsequent to the opening of this appeal, in a July 25th email, Deputy Superintendent Luff informed an attorney in the Public Records Division the following: “[p]lease note, the redactions in these text chains are what was provided to me by [S]chool [C]ommittee [M]embers. These particular redactions were made to personal texts, were not in the timeframe for what was requested by Ms. Sutter, nor were they regarding [S]chool [C]ommittee business.” Burden of Specificity The School’s July 25th email response 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 text messages fall within an exemption. It is also not clear from the School’s response, what information relating to an individual or individuals was redacted from the responsive records. As a result, I find the School did not meet its burden in responding to this records request. 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. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3)(c)(4). Conclusion Accordingly, the School is ordered to provide Ms. Sutter with a response to her request 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 the response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us.

Timothy Luff, Deputy Superintendent SPR23/1657 Page 3 July 26, 2023 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Karin Sutter