Michael Pacy v. Shrewsbury, Town of - Public Schools (SPR 20251765)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records June 27, 2025 SPR25/1765 Chris Girardi Records Access Officer Shrewsbury Public School District 100 Maple Avenue Shrewsbury, MA 01545 Dear Mr. Girardi: I have received the petition of Michael Pacy appealing the response of the Shrewsbury Public 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 May 2, 2025, Mr. Pacy requested, “… the survey results for a survey sent out on April 17, 2025 via the Superintendent Update email … I am requesting both survey results for the Parent/Community one and Staff one.” On May 16, 2025, Mr. Pacy clarified that he was not seeking the comments section from either survey. Prior Appeal This request was the subject of a prior appeal. See SPR25/1584 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (June 11, 2025). In my June 11th determination, I found that the District had not provided a timely response to the request, and ordered it to do so within 10 business days. The District responded on June 20, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Pacy petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/1765, 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

Chris Girardi SPR25/1765 Page 2 June 27, 2025 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 June 20th Response In its June 20, 2025 response, the District provided Mr. Pacy with redacted copies of the requested survey results. Current Appeal In his June 20, 2025 petition to this office, Mr. Pacy stated, “… [the] District only gave me the summary of the survey not the actual survey submissions that I requested … I asked for the survey results not the survey summary.” Mr. Pacy stated that he was seeking the individual submissions of all respondents to the District’s parent and staff surveys. Public Records Requests; Petitions to the Supervisor of Records Mr. Pacy is reminded that a requestor may petition the Supervisor of Records only after a written request has been made to the records access officer of the governmental entity that creates or receives the records. 950 C.M.R. 32.01(1). Additionally, the written request must reasonably describe the public records sought. Id. Where Mr. Pacy’s May 2nd request seeks the results of the District’s parent and staff surveys and not the individual submissions of respondents, I am unable to opine on this matter. It is my understanding that in a June 20, 2025 email communication to the District’s records access officer, Mr. Pacy requested the individual submissions of all survey respondents. Mr. Pacy may appeal the substantive nature of the District’s response to this request within ninety calendar days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Conclusion Accordingly, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. If Mr. Pacy is not satisfied with the resolution of this administrative appeal, please be advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b).

Chris Girardi SPR25/1765 Page 3 June 27, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Michael Pacy