DaSilva, Ana v. Greater New Bedford Regional Vocational Technical High School (SPR 20260565)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records March 3, 2026 SPR26/0565 Maria Fredette Records Access Officer Greater New Bedford Regional Vocational Technical High School 1121 Ashley Boulevard New Bedford, MA 02745 Dear Ms. Fredette: I have received the petition of Ana DaSilva appealing the response of the Greater New Bedford Regional Vocational Technical High School (School/ GNBVT) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On February 12, 2026, Ms. DaSilva requested: [1] Records of Complaints or Allegations Involving [an identified individual] during [an identified individual’s] employment with GNBVT. This includes:  written complaints  parent or student complaints  staff complaints or concerns  emails documenting a complaint  any record showing that a complaint was received Please redact student names or identifying information as required by FERPA. [2] Records of Any Investigation Conducted by GNBVT Involving [an identified individual] This includes:  notices of investigation  findings or conclusions  summaries of investigative steps  letters of concern  any final determination I am not requesting draft notes or deliberative materials. 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

Maria Fredette SPR26/0565 Page 2 March 3, 2026 [3] Records of Final Disciplinary Action, if Any This includes:  written warnings  reprimands  suspension notices  last‑chance agreements  any final action taken These records are routinely disclosable with redactions. [4] Records of Administrative Leave or Reassignment This includes:  notices placing [an identified individual] on paid or unpaid administrative leave  notices of temporary reassignment  any final documentation of such actions [5] Records Required to Be Reported to DESE If applicable:  603 CMR 7.15 educator misconduct reports  any licensure‑related notifications  any mandatory reporting to DESE regarding [an identified individual] If no such records exist, please provide a brief certification of nonexistence. [6] Records of Resignation or Separation  This includes:  resignation letter  separation agreement  settlement agreement (with redactions as needed) These documents are not categorically exempt and often contain segregable portions. [7] School Committee Records Related to [an identified individual] This includes:  minutes  agendas  votes  public‑facing documents referencing his employment or separation The School responded on February 18, 2026. Unsatisfied with the School’s response, Ms. DaSilva petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/0565, was opened as a result. Subsequent to the opening of this appeal, the School provided a further response on February 27, 2026.

Maria Fredette SPR26/0565 Page 3 March 3, 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. The School’s February 18th and February 27th Responses On February 18, 2026, the School stated, “[w]e have looked in [an identified individual]’s personnel file and can confirm that the district does not have any documents that would be responsive to your request concerning [an identified individual]’s employment.” Later on February 18th, the School stated, “…there are no responsive files.” On February 27, 2026, the School stated that it withheld certain records pursuant to Exemption (c) of the Public Records Law. See G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c). Current Appeal In her appeal petition, Ms. DaSilva contends: My request was not limited to the personnel file. … GNBVT did not indicate whether it searched administrative email accounts, HR records, superintendent or principal communications, investigation files, DESE reporting submissions, or School Committee materials. … In July 2025, GNBVT responded to a similar request regarding the same former employee. In that response, the District:  acknowledged that responsive categories existed

Maria Fredette SPR26/0565 Page 4 March 3, 2026  stated it would withhold certain materials under exemption (c)  referenced categories such as complaints, investigations, internal communications, and separation‑related discussions 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 Association v. School 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. Second Clause – Privacy Analysis under Exemption (c) is subjective in nature and requires a balancing of the public’s right to know against the relevant privacy interests at stake. Torres v. Att’y Gen., 391 Mass. 1, 9 (1984); Att’y Gen. v. Assistant Comm’r of Real Prop. Dep’t, 380 Mass. 623, 625 (1980). Therefore, determinations must be made on a case-by-case basis.

Maria Fredette SPR26/0565 Page 5 March 3, 2026 This exemption does not protect all data relating to specifically named individuals. Rather, there are factors to consider when assessing the weight of the privacy interest at stake: (1) whether disclosure would result in personal embarrassment to an individual of normal sensibilities; (2) whether the materials sought contain intimate details of a highly personal nature; and (3) whether the same information is available from other sources. See People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) v. Dep’t of Agric. Res., 477 Mass. 280, 292 (2017). The types of personal information which this exemption is designed to protect includes: marital status, paternity, substance abuse, government assistance, family disputes and reputation. Id. at 292 n.13; see also Doe v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles, 26 Mass. App. Ct. 415, 427 (1988) (holding that a motor vehicle licensee has a privacy interest in disclosure of his social security number). This exemption requires a balancing test which provides that where the public interest in obtaining the requested information substantially outweighs the seriousness of any invasion of privacy, the private interest in preventing disclosure must yield. PETA, 477 Mass. at 291. The public has a recognized interest in knowing whether public servants are carrying out their duties in a law-abiding and efficient manner. Id. at 292. In its response, the School states: The District intends to withhold any responsive records that are exempt under the privacy exemption set forth at M.G.L. c. 4, §7(26)(c). The privacy exemption applies to any records that may contain personnel information relating to specifically named individuals, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. See M.G.L. c. 4, §7(26)(c); Wakefield Teachers Ass’n. v. School Committee of Wakefield, 431 Mass. 792, 797-800 (2000) (“core categories of personnel information” that may be withheld from disclosure, includes “employment applications, employee work evaluations, disciplinary documentation, and promotion, demotion, or termination information pertaining to a particular employee.”) Because your request seeks the personnel information of a specifically named individual, which includes “records of hiring, titles, assignments, promotions, and separation from employment,” the District intends to withhold such any records relating to the employee’s separation or resignation because they are statutorily exempt from disclosure. Id. To the extent your request seeks any records relating to complaints, investigations, or personnel concerns and/or internal communications regarding the specifically named individual’s employment or separation from employment, that information would also be exempt from disclosure under exemption (c). Wakefield Teachers Ass’n, 431 Mass. at. 798-799; see also Richter v. Phillips, 2581CV0054 (Mass. Sup. Ct., Dec. 19, 2025) (finding disclosure of investigation report would result in substantial invasion of privacy to complainant, third-party employees, and the employee complained against). Notwithstanding the applicable exemption cited above, the District does not possess any records

Maria Fredette SPR26/0565 Page 6 March 3, 2026 responsive to your requests seeking information about complaints, investigations, disciplinary action, administrative leave or reassignment, DESE reporting, and/or any other records relating to the specifically named individual. Based on the School’s response, it is unclear which specific records the School intends to withhold. The School must identify the records, categories of records, or portions of records it intends to withhold or redact under Exemption (c). 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”). Conclusion Accordingly, the School is ordered to provide Ms. DaSilva 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. DaSilva 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: Ana DaSilva