David Fitzgerald v. Medway, Town of - Public Schools (SPR 20253087)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records November 3, 2025 SPR25/3087 Patrick McIntyre Records Access Officer Medway Public Schools 45 Holliston Street Medway, MA 02053 Dear Mr. McIntyre: I have received the petition of David Fitzgerald appealing the response of the Medway Public Schools (School) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On October 10, 2025, Mr. Fitzgerald requested “a copy of all hand written notes taken by [a named individual] at the school committee meeting on 10/9/25.” The School responded on October 22, 2025. Unsatisfied with the School’s response, Mr. Fitzgerald petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR25/3087, 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 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

Patrick McIntyre SPR25/3087 Page 2 November 3, 2025 custodian must provide the responsive records. The School’s October 22nd Response In its October 22, 2025 response, the School states that it is withholding responsive records pursuant to Exemption (e) of the Public Records Law. See G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(e). Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Fitzgerald provides a link to a video and argues the following: The district has claimed an exemption for personal notes claiming that Ms. Nassiff’s notes were not shared with anyone else. Video from the meeting on October 9th clearly shows Ms. Nassiff write a note on the bottom right corner of a piece of paper. Ms. Nassiff then points at the note with her pen, and looks over to Vice Chair Melissa Greenfield. Ms. Greenfield can then be seen reading Ms. Nassiff’s note. This was clearly a written communication between two members of the committee during a meeting. Exemption (e) Exemption (e) permits the withholding of: notebooks and other materials prepared by an employee of the commonwealth which are personal to him and not maintained as part of the files of the governmental unit G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(e). The exemption may not be applied by custodians of records to withhold materials intended for communication or preservation. Records are protected from mandatory disclosure by Exemption (e) only if they meet the two criteria of the exemption. The first criterion of Exemption (e) limits its application to work-related records that can be characterized as “personal” to the employee, such as personal reflections on work-related activities and notes created by an employee to assist him/her in preparing reports for other employees or for the files of the governmental entity. Notes that have been shared by the employee may not be considered to be “personal” pursuant to Exemption (e). The second criterion of Exemption (e) requires that the notes not be kept in a government file. Under the exemption, “files of the governmental unit” excludes working files that are transitory in nature. Such files lack the permanent nature of a government file. Therefore, the retention of materials in such a working file would not bar the application of Exemption (e) and the records custodian may withhold from disclosure any personal notes that were not shared with others and were not part of such a governmental file.”

Patrick McIntyre SPR25/3087 Page 3 November 3, 2025 In its response, under Exemption (e), the School argues the following: Any notes taken by Ms. Nassiff during this meeting were her personal notes. M.G.L. c. 4, §7(26)(e) exempts from public disclosure the “notebooks and other materials prepared by an employee of the commonwealth which are personal to him and not maintained as part of the files of the governmental unit.” This exemption applies to personal notes prepared by District employees for work- related matters, provided the notes are not shared with anyone else in the District and are not maintained as part of the District’s files. Ms. Nassiff’s personal notes were not shared with anyone else and are not part of the District’s files. As such, any notes are exempt and are not being produced. In this case, the School has explained that the responsive records are not maintained as part of a government file and has explained that the responsive records constitute “notebooks and other materials,” as contemplated by the statute. See G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(e). However, based on the information provided in Mr. Fitzgerald’s appeal petition, I find it is unclear whether the responsive records were shared with other government officials. The School must clarify this. Conclusion Accordingly, the School is ordered to provide Mr. Fitzgerald with a response to the 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. Fitzgerald may further appeal the substantive nature of the School’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: David Fitzgerald