Vincelli, AJ v. UMASS Dartmouth (SPR 20260345)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Office Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records February 17, 2026 SPR26/0345 Ryan C. Merrill Director of Strategic Communications & Media Relations University of Massachusetts – Dartmouth Office of Public Affairs 285 Old Westport Road Dartmouth, MA 02747 Dear Mr. Merrill: I have received the petition of AJ Vincelli appealing the response of the University of Massachusetts – Dartmouth (UMass) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On January 11, 2026, the AJ Vincelli sought, . . . directory information of each UMass Dartmouth graduate student (including SMAST and Law School graduate students) for the Spring 2026 semester [including]: First name[,] Last name[,] Preferred name[,] Permanent residence address, including Country[,] University email address[,] All available telephone numbers, including Preferred (note that international phone numbers are longer than 10 digits, please provide all digits)[,] Matriculation date, in human-readable format (“Original Admit Term Description”)[,] Degree being pursued including department/program (‘Plan Transcript Description’)[,] Degree type being pursued, such as PhD, MS, MFA, JD, DNP, etc.[,] Academic college/school …[,] Enrollment status (Full Time or Part Time)[,] Estimated graduation date, in human-readable format …[,] For graduate students who are teaching credit courses only: teaching department and employment category (teaching assistant, teaching fellow, studio assistant, or instructional assistant)[.] On January 23, 2026 and February 2, 2026, UMass provided responses. Unsatisfied with the responses, AJ Vincelli petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/0345, was opened as a result. 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

Ryan C. Merrill SPR26/0345 Page 2 February 17, 2026 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. UMass’ January 23rd and February 2nd Responses In its January 23, 2026 response, UMass denied access to the records and stated, Please review our FERPA policy at … which states: “Although items may be designated by UMass Dartmouth as directory information, only a limited amount of this information is disclosed by UMass Dartmouth officials. The University retains the discretion to refuse to disclose directory information if it believes such disclosure would be an infringement of the student’s privacy rights. Lists of students including any directory information above are not normally allowed to be released for non-UMass Dartmouth purposes.” We, therefore, respectfully decline to provide this directory information because doing so would be an infringement of our students’ privacy rights and would not serve a UMass Dartmouth purpose. In its February 2, 2026 response, UMass stated, “[a]pologies, you can find the correct link here …” Current Appeal In his appeal, AJ Vincelli states as follows: … the nature of my objection is based on UMass Dartmouth’s compliance with 5 previous Public Information Requests for the same information from 7 prior

Ryan C. Merrill SPR26/0345 Page 3 February 17, 2026 semesters (Fall 2023, Spring 2024, Summer 2024, Fall 2024, Spring 2025, Summer 2025, and Fall 2025). Please see the attached previous Public Record Request responses. I have submitted these requests at the beginning of each semester since Fall 2024, and my previous requests were never denied. UMass Dartmouth never assessed any fees, nor did they ever request a deadline extension. I have never abused the previously-provided records, nor have I used them for any commercial purpose, to harass or intimidate the agency, or for any other unlawful purpose. Therefore, I request that UMass Dartmouth furnish the requested public records without delay. Burden of Specificity UMass’s January 23rd response did not contain the specificity required in a denial of access to public records. UMass withheld the requested records without claiming any exemption(s) in the Public Records Law that would support withholding the requested records. Under the Public Records Law, the burden shall be upon the custodian to prove with specificity the exemption which applies. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv) (a written response must “identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based”); see also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Police Comm’r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); Flatley, 419 Mass. at 511. As a result, I find that UMass did not satisfy its burden in responding to this records request. Consequently, UMass must identify an exemption that applies to withhold the records from disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b). Further, it is uncertain how the records can be withheld in their entirety. UMass must explain whether the records can be redacted so that segregable portions can be provided. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); Reinstein v. Police Comm’r of Boston, 378 Mass. 281, 289-90 (1979) (the statutory exemptions are narrowly construed and are not blanket in nature). Any non-exempt, segregable portion of a public record is subject to mandatory disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § 10(a). Conclusion Accordingly, UMass is ordered to provide AJ Vincelli with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten 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. AJ Vincelli may appeal the substantive nature of UMass’ response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1).

Ryan C. Merrill SPR26/0345 Page 4 February 17, 2026 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: AJ Vincelli