Steven Bachelor v. Holyoke Community College (SPR 20252844)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records October 6, 2025 SPR25/2844 Narayan Sampath Records Access Officer Holyoke Community College 303 Homestead Avenue Holyoke, MA 01040 Dear Mr. Sampath: I have received the petition of Steven Bachelor appealing the response of Holyoke Community College (College) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On September 12, 2025, Mr. Bachelor requested “all public records maintained by Holyoke Community College relating to [an identified individual’s] NUP and Title IX complaints against [an identified individual], including all evidence of retaliation, communications, policies, and administrative actions.” Specifically, Mr. Bachelor sought: [1] Respondent Records - Emails, memos, text messages, notes, or any communications directly or indirectly related to the complaints or protected activity. - Work assignments, schedules, directives, or instructions showing differential treatment, harassment, or retaliation. - Performance evaluations, disciplinary documents, or other administrative records issued by or involving the respondent. - Meeting notes, summaries, or records where the complainant or protected activity was discussed. [2] Administrative and Investigative Materials - Names of all witnesses identified by the respondent or institution. - Witness statements or reports relevant to the complaint (as permitted by law). - Investigators’ reports, evidence summaries, or supporting documentation used in both NUP and Title IX investigations. - Meeting agendas, minutes, or notes from HR, VP Cabinet, or other administrative bodies discussing the complaints or related issues. 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

Narayan Sampath SPR25/2844 Page 2 October 6, 2025 [4] [sic] Outcomes and Corrective Actions - Documentation of any disciplinary actions (including all emails), corrective measures, or policy enforcement taken against the respondent. - Written communications reflecting final decisions or institutional responses regarding the complaints. - Any reports or records submitted to state or federal agencies related to these complaints. The College responded on September 26, 2025. Unsatisfied with the College’s response, Mr. Bachelor petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2844, 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). 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 College’s September 26th Response In its September 26, 2025 response, the College responded to each item of the request in turn and cited Exemption (c) of the Public Records Law to withhold all responsive records Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Bachelor stated, “Exemption (c) cannot be applied categorically to shield records that are necessary for civil rights enforcement.”

Narayan Sampath SPR25/2844 Page 3 October 6, 2025 Exemption (c) Exemption (c) permits the withholding of: personnel and medical files or information and any other materials or data relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy; provided, however, that this subclause shall not apply to records related to a law enforcement misconduct investigation. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c). First Clause – Personnel Information While statutorily exempting personnel information from the expansive definition of public records, the Legislature did not explicitly define “personnel [file] or information.” G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c). Judicial decisions advise that the term is neither rigid, nor exact, and that the determination is case-specific. Worcester Telegram & Gazette Corp. v. Chief of Police of Worcester, 58 Mass App Ct 1, 5 (2003). The custodian’s classification of materials as “personnel information” is not conclusive. Wakefield Teacher’s Ass’n v. Sch. Comm. of Wakefield, 431 Mass. 792, 798 (2000). Instead, the nature or character of the documents, as opposed to the documents’ label, is crucial to the analysis. See Worcester Telegram & Gazette Corp., 436 Mass. at 386. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (Court) has refined the analysis to be employed when considering the public record status of personnel records. The Court has held that personnel information that is “useful in making employment decisions regarding an employee” may be withheld pursuant to the first clause of exemption (c). Wakefield Teacher’s Ass’n, 431 Mass. at 798, quoting Oregonian Publ. Co.v. Portland Sch. Dist. No. 1J, 329 Or. 401 (1999). The Court further defined those records that may be withheld as personnel information to include, “employment applications, employee work evaluations, disciplinary documentation, and promotion, demotion, or termination information pertaining to a particular employee.” Wakefield Teacher’s Ass’n, 431 Mass. at 798. Item 1 – Respondent Records Regarding the requested respondent records, the College stated, “[a]ny potentially responsive documents fall within Exemption (c) as they would either relate to disciplinary documentation pertaining to a particular employee and/or information that is useful in making employment decisions regarding an employee.” Item 2 – Administrative and Investigative Materials Regarding the requested administrative and investigative materials, the College stated, “…these records fall within Exemption (c) and will not be produced, as any potentially

Narayan Sampath SPR25/2844 Page 4 October 6, 2025 responsive documents would be considered personnel information that is useful in making employment decisions regarding an employee.” Item 3 - Outcomes and Corrective Actions Regarding the requested outcomes and corrective actions, the College stated, “…these records also fall within Exemption (c) and will not be produced, as any potentially responsive documents would either relate to disciplinary documentation pertaining to a particular employee and/or information that is useful in making employment decisions regarding an employee.” Although the District indicates that all of the responsive records constitute personnel information, the District has not demonstrated how the requested records fall within the core categories of personnel information described in Wakefield as useful in making employment decisions regarding an employee, and exempt under Exemption (c). See Wakefield, 431 Mass. at 798. The District must clarify these matters. It is additionally uncertain what records the District possesses that are responsive to the request. To deny access to a record under the Public Records Law, a records access officer must identify the record, categories of records, or portions of the record it intends to withhold. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3)(c)(4). Consequently, the District must identify the records in its possession that it is withholding under Exemption (c). Conclusion Accordingly, the District is ordered to provide Mr. Bachelor with a response to his request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within ten (10) 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. Bachelor 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: Steven Bachelor