Kristi Pakkila v. Ashburnham-Westminster Regional School District (SPR 20253737)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records December 23, 2025 SPR25/3737 Eric DeHays Records Access Officer Ashburnham-Westminster Regional School District 11 Oakmont Drive Ashburnham, MA 01430 Dear Mr. DeHays: I have received the petition of Kristi Pakkila appealing the response of Ashburnham- Westminster Regional School District (School) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On October 14, 2025, Ms. Pakkila requested “[t]he professional resume(s) of [three identified individuals] along with copies of his/her professional certifications, redacted of any information that is statutorily exempt from disclosure.” Prior Appeal The requested records were the subject of a prior appeal. See SPR25/3189 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (November 13, 2025). In my November 13th determination, I ordered the School to provide reasonable assistance to Ms. Pakkila in locating the requested records on the public website they had directed her to. On November 20, 2025, the School provided some responsive records. The School responded on November 20, 2025. Unsatisfied with the School’s response, Ms. Pakkila petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3737, 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

Eric DeHays SPR25/3737 Page 2 December 23, 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 School’s November 20th Response On November 20, 2025, the School provided records responsive to Ms. Pakkila’s request and stated: [The first identified individual] is a teacher licensed by the MA Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE). Her licensure information is attached… [The second identified individual] is a Board Certified Behavior Analyst. As such her position is not licensed by DESE but rather by the Behavior Analyst Certification Board. Her licensure information is also attached… [The third identified individual] was previously employed as a substitute teacher in the district, she is no longer employed by the school district at this time. As a short-term (less than 90 days) substitute teacher, she was not required to be licensed by DESE. Current Appeal In her appeal petition, Ms. Pakkila argues: The District’s November 20 response did not provide the requested assistance. The response consisted only of a general link to the DESE educator lookup page, without identifying which certifications responsive to my request exist beyond what is displayed publicly, and without confirming whether the District possesses any records reflecting specialized structured literacy training relevant to instruction for students with dyslexia. On November 21, I contacted the District to request clarification specifically regarding the Orton-Gillingham certification level held by [an identified individual], which is the structured literacy approach being used for my child’s instruction. As of today, I have not received a response from the District.

Eric DeHays SPR25/3737 Page 3 December 23, 2025 In light of the Supervisor’s order, I respectfully request your assistance to ensure that the District complies with SPR25-3189 by confirming whether any Orton- Gillingham or other structured literacy certifications responsive to my request exist, and if so, producing them as required. Records in Existence 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). Under the Public Records Law, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). In accordance with the Public Records Law, 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). Based on the School’s response, in conjunction with Ms. Pakkila’s appeal petition, it is unclear if the School possesses additional records responsive to the above request. Specifically, the School must clarify whether it possesses “any Orton-Gillingham or other structured literacy certifications.” Conclusion Accordingly, the School is ordered to provide Ms. Pakkila 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. Ms. Pakkila 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: Kristi Pakkila