Math Parents Belmont v. Belmont, Town of - Public Schools (SPR 20253164)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records November 7, 2025 SPR25/3164 Artemis Tingos Executive Assistant to the Superintendent Belmont Public Schools 644 Pleasant Street Belmont, MA 02478 Dear Ms. Tingos: I have received the petition of Belmont Math Parents (requestor) appealing the response of the Belmont 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 April 2, 2025, the requestor requested, regarding the Mathematics Diagnostic Testing Project (MDTP), the following: [1] The actual and budgeted cost of the program/testing in the 2023-2024 and 2024-2025 school years. Please provide records related to the cost breakdown of materials and personnel (including but not limited to training or professional development costs), including the budget line item code (row and line) for each expense, and if applicable, the purchase or invoice order number and purchase date. [2] All records or reports showing the de-identified or aggregate results of students who have taken a MDTP test, by grade level and subject matter, including but not limited to section/topic specific reports generated from students’ diagnostic data, during the 2023-2024 and 2024-2025 school years. The School responded on April 10, 2025 and August 22, 2025. Unsatisfied with the School’s responses, the requestor petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3164, 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 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

Artemis Tingos SPR25/3164 Page 2 November 7, 2025 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 School’s April 10th and August 22nd Responses In its April 10, 2025 response, the School stated, “[y]our Public Records Request has been fulfilled. We have released all of the requested records to you…We now consider your request closed.” In its August 22, 2025 response, the School stated, “[a]ll records that were responsive to your request of April 2, 2025, were released. No other records exist. This request was closed on April 10, 2025.” Current Appeal In their appeal, the requestor states, “[the School] released two limited spreadsheets (7th Grade MDTP Results 4.10.25.pdf; 8th Grade MDTP Results 4.10.25.pdf) that omitted key details such as test dates, student groupings, etc. Upon request for clarification, [the School] stated they ‘were for Algebra readiness taken at end of 2023-2024 for the 2024-2025 school year placement’ but provided no records identifying test dates or assessments. No records were produced for the 2024 6th Grade assessments, despite results being emailed to families, accessible via the MDTP platform, discussed by district personnel in emails and used by personnel to make placement decisions. Requester clarified that the MDTP platform contained additional responsive records. [The School] falsely asserted…no other records exists.” Subsequent to the opening of this appeal, the School contacted the Public Records Division via email on October 29, 2025, stating, “[i]f a report does not exist at the time of a submission (ex. April 2, 2025), the [the School] reports there is no report responsive to the request at the time of the request. The [School] does not automatically pull all reports a system is capable of creating. Although the MDTP system has the capability to email families their individual test results, it does not mean the [School] or system automatically generated a report to go along with that act.”

Artemis Tingos SPR25/3164 Page 3 November 7, 2025 Where the School may extract some or all of the responsive information to satisfy the request, the School is advised that extracting records or information from records that are already in existence and in its possession, custody, or control, is not creation of a record. 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). The School is directed to a 2020 Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts (Court) decision relative to creating a record versus extraction of information from databases in order to produce records or information in response to a public records request. In Att’y Gen. v. Dist. Attorney for the Plymouth Dist., et al. (Plymouth Dist.) 484 Mass. 260 (2020), the Court stated: …where public records are in electronic form, as they increasingly are and will be, a public records request that requires a government entity to search its electronic database to extract requested data does not mean that the extracted data constitute the creation of a new record under the public records law. This interpretation of the public records law is supported by the regulations promulgated by the supervisor, who is required to adopt regulations to implement the public records law. Plymouth Dist., 484 Mass. at 275. The School is advised that, 950 C.M.R. 32.07(1)(f), also provides that “[f]urnishing a segregable portion of a public record shall not be deemed to be creation of a new record. This applies to a responsive record in the form of an extract of existing data, as such data exists at the time of the request and is segregable from nonresponsive and exempt data.” Based on the School’s October 29, 2025 response, I find that the School must clarify whether the requested records can be extracted from its MDTP system. Conclusion Accordingly, the School is ordered to provide the requestor with a response to the request 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. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Belmont Math Parents