Leiha Maldonado v. Mohawk Trail Regional School District (SPR 20251371)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records May 29, 2025 SPR25/1371 Shana Garcia Executive Secretary to the Superintendent Mohawk Trail Regional School District 24 Ashfield Road Shelburne Falls, MA 01370 Dear Ms. Garcia: I have received the petition of Leiha Maldonado appealing the response of the Mohawk Trail 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 April 30, 2025, Ms. Maldonado requested the following records: [1] any public records held by the district or school that contain communications (or records of communications) to/from [an identified] police detective or make mention of [an identified] police detective in any way from 12/01/24 to the date of this request. [2] any public records that contain any communication related to the possible event that has since caused what the superintendent has admitted is an internal investigation, or related more broadly to how one might or should proceed in such an investigation involving [an identified] police detective again I seek such records from 12/01/24 to the date of this request. [3] any public records related to communication to MA State Police, the Shelburne Falls Police department, any other law enforcement, as well as DESE related to [an identified police detective] and/or whatever matter the school says they are investigating in relation to him, again from 12/01/24 to the date of this request. The District responded on May 15, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Ms. Maldonado petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/1371, was opened as a result. 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

Shana Garcia SPR25/1371 Page 2 May 29, 2025 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. See 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 May 15th Response In its May 15, 2025, the District stated as follows: Item 1: The Mohawk Trail and Hawlemont Regional School Districts do not have any responsive records. Item 2: The in-camera review was due on May 13, 2025. Therefore, those records have not been released yet. We will determine whether to release them based on the results of the in-camera review. Item 3: The Mohawk Trail and Hawlemont Regional School Districts do not have any responsive records. Current Appeal In her May 15, 2025 appeal, Ms. Maldonado states, “[i]n the February 3, 2025 determination related to SPR25/0223 and the February 21, 2025, and April 29, 2025 determinations related to SPR25/0381, the District cited Exemptions (a) and (c) of the Public Records Law to withhold the requested records, not that there were no responsive records. According to the Public Records Appeals Status database, an additional in-camera review related to either determination (SPR25/0223, SPR25/0381) has not been ordered by the Supervisor of Records. It is unclear what the District is referring to regarding item (2).”

Shana Garcia SPR25/1371 Page 3 May 29, 2025 Based on Ms. Maldonado’s claims, in conjunction with the District’s response, it is unclear if the District possesses any 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 responsive records exist. Conclusion Accordingly, the District is ordered to provide Ms. Maldonado 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. Maldonado may appeal the substantive nature of the District’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Leiha Maldonado