Michael Klein v. Pioneer Valley Chinese Immersion Charter School (SPR 20243196)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records December 11, 2024 SPR24/3196 Kathleen Wang Principal Pioneer Valley Chinese Immersion Charter School 317 Russell Street Hadley, MA 01035 Dear Principal Wang: I have received the petition of Michael Klein appealing the response of the Pioneer Valley Chinese Immersion Charter School (School) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On October 3, 2024, Mr. Klein requested “… copies of school surveys for the past 4 years (8 surveys).” On November 8, 2024, Mr. Klein modified his request to seek “… all parent surveys in possession of [the School] prior to 2021.” The School provided a response on November 25, 2024. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Klein petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR24/3196, was opened as a result. Subsequent to the opening of this appeal, the School provided a supplemental response on December 4, 2024. Fee Estimates – Municipalities A municipality may assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record except those records that are freely available for public inspection. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). The fees must reflect the actual cost of complying with a particular request. Id. A maximum fee of five cents ($.05) per page may be assessed for a black and white single or double-sided photocopy of a public record. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(i). Municipalities may not assess a fee for the first (two) 2 hours of employee time to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce the record or records requested unless the municipality has 20,000 people or less. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii). Where appropriate, municipalities may include as part of the fee an hourly rate equal to or less than the hourly rate attributed to the lowest paid employee who has the necessary skill required to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce a record requested, but the fee shall not be more than $25 per hour. Id. However, municipalities may charge more than $25 per hour if such rate is approved by the Supervisor of Records under a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). 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

Kathleen Wang SPR24/3196 Page 2 December 11, 2024 A fee shall not be assessed for time spent segregating or redacting records unless such segregation or redaction is required by law or approved by the Supervisor of Records under a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). The School’s November 25th and December 4th Responses In its November 25, 2024 response, the School provided Mr. Klein with two records responsive to his request. The School gave a fee estimate of $250.00 to provide the remaining responsive records, stating: Law allows for charging of public records requests. Due to the volume of your request and time to comply with this request, in accordance with said Public Records Law, I have determined that it would take approximately 10 hours to locate and redact as legally required, the remaining requested documents. In accordance with the Public Records Law, the hourly fee assessed cannot exceed $25.00 per hour. We are waiving the fee for copying since we will send softcopy. In its December 4, 2024 response, the School provided further clarification on the calculation of its fee estimate, stating: In your appeal on November 26, 2024 you stated that you should not be charged for this request as you believe other persons have requested the same documents and therefore multiple persons are being charged for the same work. Please be aware that your understanding is not correct. The [School] has received requests from other parties for different documents, but not for the specific records you have requested. The [School] originally provided you with the surveys from 2018-2024 without charge in an effort of transparency. However, due to the significant time that your additional request will take to locate and appropriately redact surveys from 2008-2018, the [School] is exercising its right to charge for the additional request. The reason the school [is] anticipating one hour per survey year is due to the lengthy process of redacting student information from the surveys as well as personnel information within the comment section of the survey results. The school needs to read through each comment carefully to determine appropriate legally required redactions. Additionally, due to the age of the surveys being requested, it will take the school significant time to search through its records for all of the surveys you are requesting. Some surveys were requested before the school had initiated using the virtual survey option and as such, the old physical copies will need to be located, should they still exist. The school also believes there may have been some years that an outside consultant was hired to conduct the surveys.

Kathleen Wang SPR24/3196 Page 3 December 11, 2024 Although the School has estimated that the process of compiling, reviewing, and preparing responsive documents for production will take 10 hours of employee time, it is unclear how the School requires this many hours to produce responsive records. It is also not clear from the School’s estimate how many hours are allocated to search, and how many hours are allocated for segregation, and redaction of the records. As such, the School must provide further details regarding its fee estimate. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv) (requiring the amount of the fee be reasonable). Additionally, I find the School must provide information about whether the responsive records contain information that is required by law to be segregated or redacted, as well as the applicable statutes, if any. It is also unclear if the School’s November 25th fee estimate includes the first two hours of employee time required to respond to the request. Municipal entities may not assess a fee for the first (two) 2 hours of employee time to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce the record or records requested unless the municipality has 20,000 people or less. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii). The School must clarify this matter. The School must also clarify whether $25.00 per hour is the hourly rate of the lowest paid employee who has the skill required to search for, compile, segregate, redact, or reproduce the requested records. For the reasons discussed above, I find the School must revise its fee estimate or provide further explanation of how the fee of $250.00 assessed in its November 25th estimate is consistent with G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). This office encourages Mr. Klein and the School to communicate further in order to facilitate providing records more efficiently and affordably. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vii) (a municipality shall suggest a reasonable modification of the scope of the request or offer to assist the requestor to modify the scope of the request if doing so would enable the municipality to produce the records sought more efficiently and affordably). Any revision to the request would result in the requirement to issue a revised fee estimate. Conclusion Accordingly, the School is ordered to provide Mr. Klein 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. Mr. Klein may appeal the substantive nature of the School’s response within ninety days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1).

Kathleen Wang SPR24/3196 Page 4 December 11, 2024 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Michael Klein