John McDonnell v. Andover, Town of - Public Schools (SPR 20251322)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records May 14, 2025 SPR25/1322 Nicole L. Kieser Director of Communications Andover Public Schools 30 Whittier Court Andover, MA 01810 Dear Ms. Kieser: On May 13, 2025, this office received your petition on behalf of the Andover Public Schools (School) seeking permission to charge for time spent segregating or redacting responsive records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). As required by law, it is my understanding that the School furnished a copy of the petition to the requestor, John McDonnell, Esq. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On May 6, 2025, Attorney McDonnell requested fifty-four items from the School including documents related to the redistricting process, the engagement of the consultant for redistricting, and various e-mail communications. In a telephone call to this Office on May 13, 2025, and subsequent correspondence to this Office on May 14, 2025, Attorney McDonnell objected to the School’s petition. Petition to assess fees – Municipalities The Supervisor may approve a petition from a municipality to charge for time spent segregating or redacting or to charge in excess of $25 per hour, if the Supervisor determines that 1) the request is for a commercial purpose or 2) the fee represents an actual and good faith representation by the municipality to comply with the request. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). In rendering such a decision, the Supervisor is required to consider the following: a) the public interest served by limiting the cost of public access to the records; b) the financial ability of the requestor to pay the additional or increased fees; and c) any other relevant extenuating circumstances. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). The statute sets out a two-prong test for determining whether the Supervisor may approve a municipality’s petition to allow the municipality to charge for time spent segregating or 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

Nicole L. Kieser SPR25/1228 Page 2 May 14, 2025 redacting records or to charge in excess of $25 an hour for the provision of public records. The first prong is whether the request for records was made for a commercial purpose. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). It is my understanding that this request was not made for a commercial purpose. The second prong of the test is whether the fee represents an actual and good faith representation by the municipality to comply with the request. The Supervisor must consider 1) if the fee is necessary such that the request could not have been prudently completed without the redaction or segregation or fee in excess of $25 per hour; 2) the amount of the fee is reasonable; and 3) the fee is not designed to limit, deter or prevent access to requested public records. Id. Petitions seeking a waiver of statutory limits to fees assessed to segregate and/or redact public records must be made within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(g). Fee Estimates – Municipalities A municipality may assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record except those records that are freely available for public inspection. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). The fees must reflect the actual cost of complying with a particular request. Id. A maximum fee of five cents ($.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 2 (two) 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). 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). Petition to Assess Fees In its petition, in addition to charging for segregation and redaction required by law pursuant to Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law and the attorney-client privilege, the School argues the following in support of its request to charge for segregation and redaction under Exemptions (c) and (o): Exemption (c) The requested documents contain materials or data relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. In particular, the records contain

Nicole L. Kieser SPR25/1228 Page 3 May 14, 2025 personal contact information for individuals involved in the requested communications. It is understood that personal phone numbers and email addresses may be withheld pursuant to Exemption (c). See SPR 13/077. The records contain communications from parents/guardians about medical information as it relates to possible redistricting. The requested documents also include communications from parents/guardians about their child’s access to special education services with possible redistricting, which qualifies as an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy and therefore must be redacted. See Champa v. Weston Public Schools, 473 Mass.86, 97 (2015). Exemption (o) The requested documents contain home addresses, personal email addresses and home telephone numbers of public employees. Based on the information provided in its fee petition, I find the School has met its burden to explain how, given the nature of the responsive records, the request could not prudently be completed without segregation or redaction. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). Conclusion As described above, to the extent the responsive records contain the exempt information described above, the School may assess a fee for segregation and redaction. Further, I encourage the parties to communicate to enable the School to provide records in an efficient and affordable manner. Attorney McDonnell may appeal any subsequent fee estimate provided by the School within 90 calendar days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Please note, Attorney McDonnell has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the appropriate superior court. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(c), 10(d)(iv)(4), 10A(c). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: John McDonnell, Esq.