Kathleen LeClair v. Old Rochester Regional School District (SPR 20240049)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records January 19, 2024 SPR24/0049 Michael S. Nelson Superintendent/Records Access Officer Old Rochester Regional School District 135 Marion Road Mattapoisett, MA 02739 Dear Superintendent Nelson: I have received the petition of Kathleen LeClair appealing the response of the Old Rochester Regional School District (District) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On December 12, 2023, Ms. LeClair requested, “[i]n accordance with Policy DD – Grants, Proposals, and Special Projects and M.G.L. 44:53A; 71:37A, provide a copy of: (a) Spending plans submitted to the School Committee for approval for the following grant funding: FY21 Hate Crimes Prevention Grant Fund Code 794 $15,324 awarded 12/23/20 FY22 Hate Crimes Prevention Grant Fund Code 794 $50,000 awarded 1/20/22 (b) copy of the ORR School Committee meeting minutes approving the expenditures of said grants and Spending Plans[.]” The District responded on January 3, 2024. Unsatisfied with the response, Ms. LeClair petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR24/0049, 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). 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

Michael S. Nelson SPR24/0049 Page 2 January 19, 2024 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 District’s January 3rd Response In its January 3, 2024 response, the District provided the completed grant applications for FY21 and FY22 Hate Crimes Prevention Grant Code 794, the confirmation of the award of said grants by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and invoices confirming the expenditure of the grant funding. The District stated, “[i]n response to Part A of your request, there are no Spending Plan documents other than the approved FY21 and FY22 Hate Crimes Prevention Grant approved grant applications that include budgets.” The District further stated, “[c]oncerning Part B of your request, there are no such documents available.” Current appeal In her appeal, Ms. LeClair asserts: “I requested to be provided with a copy of the approval of the school committee authorizing expenditure of the awarded grant funds. In addition, there is no approval on record or mention in any minutes regarding the application of this grant. Providing me a copy of the grant application does not satisfy this state law or public records request.” Based on Ms. LeClair’s claims, in conjunction with the District’s response, it is unclear if the District possesses any additional records responsive to her request. The duty to comply with requests for records extends to those records that exist and are in the possession, custody, or control of the custodian of records at the time of the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(ii). However, custodians are expected to use their superior knowledge of the records in their custody to assist requestors in obtaining the desired information. See 950 C.M.R. 32.04(5). Consequently, the District must clarify whether any additional records exist. Conclusion Accordingly, the District is ordered to provide Ms. LeClair with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten 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. Ms. LeClair may appeal the substantive nature of the District’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1).

Michael S. Nelson SPR24/0049 Page 3 January 19, 2024 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Kathleen LeClair