Shaw-Fischer, Jennifer v. Northampton, City of - Public Schools (SPR 20261295)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 16, 2026 SPR26/1295 Portia S. Bonner Superintendent Northampton Public Schools 212 Main Street Northampton MA, 01060 Dear Superintendent Bonner: I have received the petition of Jennifer Shaw-Fischer appealing the response of the Northampton 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 March 20, 2026, Ms. Shaw-Fischer requested: . . . access to all education records related to my child under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). My previous request was only partially fulfilled, as it only included communications involving me directly. This request serves to clarify that I am seeking all records maintained by the school that relate to me or my child, regardless of whether I was a direct party to the communication. Under FERPA, education records are defined broadly to include internal staff communications. This request includes, but is not limited to: [1] All emails, messages, and written correspondence between staff members referencing my child. [2] Internal communications regarding incidents, behavior, or decision-making involving my child. [3] Notes, logs, reports, or documentation maintained by teachers, administrators, office staff, or support personnel. [4] Any records used to make educational, disciplinary, or placement decisions. Please confirm receipt of this request and provide a timeline for completion consistent with FERPA requirements. 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

Portia S. Bonner SPR26/1295 Page 2 April 16, 2026 The School responded on April 2, 2026, providing a fee estimate. Unsatisfied with the response, Ms. Shaw-Fischer petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/1295, was opened as a result. Fee Estimates – Municipalities A municipality may assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record except those records that are freely available for public inspection. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). The fees must reflect the actual cost of complying with a particular request. Id. A maximum fee of five cents ($.05) per page may be assessed for a black and white single or double-sided photocopy of a public record. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(i). Municipalities may not assess a fee for the first 2 (two) hours of employee time to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce the record or records requested unless the municipality has 20,000 people or less. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii). Where appropriate, municipalities may include as part of the fee an hourly rate equal to or less than the hourly rate attributed to the lowest paid employee who has the necessary skill required to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce a record requested, but the fee shall not be more than $25 per hour. Id. However, municipalities may charge more than $25 per hour if such rate is approved by the Supervisor of Records under a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). A fee shall not be assessed for time spent segregating or redacting records unless such segregation or redaction is required by law or approved by the Supervisor of Records under a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). The School’s April 6th Fee Estimate In its April 6, 2026 response, the School assessed a fee estimate of $2,636.67 and provided the following information: As a municipality of more than 20,000 people, the law states that the first two hours of records segregating and redacting are free, but all hours after that may be charged $25 per hour. In the initial time required to program our systems to pull the potential pool of responsive records to your expansive request, the City of Northampton has identified 1,808 emails that now need to be further segregated and analyzed for possible required redaction according to one of 22 exceptions (a-v) under open meeting law. A relevant exception in this case is exception (c), which protects the privacy rights of people who have emailed the council with their personal information, information about their children’s special needs, and protected personnel matters. This means that some redaction of nearly every email will need to be performed.

Portia S. Bonner SPR26/1295 Page 3 April 16, 2026 For this reason, I estimate a cost of $2,636.67 to complete this request for you, assuming that electronic copies of responsive communications are acceptable via a shared Google directory. Additional fees exist if printing is required or a thumb drive is necessary. The price is determined as follows:  The number of emails is 1,808.  It will take at least one minute per email to read the email and determine what might need redacting, which are nonresponsive, etc. This results in 1,808 initial minutes.  Some emails will require cursory redaction, and others will require significant redaction. The estimate is a minimum of 2.5 additional minutes per email for redactions, which results in 4,520 minutes.  1,808 minutes + 4,520 minutes equals 6,328 minutes.  6,328 minutes / 60 minutes equals 105.467 hours.  We’ve spent one hour of the two free hours provided for in public records guidance pulling the files and calculating this cost. That makes 103.467 hours reimbursable.  103.467 hours * $25/hour is $2,636.67. Current Appeal In her appeal petition, Ms. Shaw-Fischer contends: My request is governed by both the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and Massachusetts student records regulations (603 CMR 23.00). Under 603 CMR 23.07(2)(a), schools may charge a reasonable fee for copies of records; however, they may not charge a fee that would prevent a parent from exercising their right to inspect and review those records. Additionally, FERPA does not permit schools to charge fees for the search, retrieval, or redaction of student records. The fee assessed appears to include these impermissible charges. . . . For these reasons, I respectfully request that your office: Waive or significantly reduce the assessed fee[,] [r]equire the district to provide access to the records without impermissible charges[,] [and] [e]nsure compliance with FERPA and 603 CMR 23.00[.] Ms. Shaw-Fischer is advised that the Office of the Supervisor of Records is statutorily empowered with the authority to determine the public record status of government records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10. Further, in compliance with the Public Records Law, the Supervisor of Records may only issue determinations where a violation of G. L. c. 66, § 10 has been alleged. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A(a). Please note that alleged violations of Department of Elementary and Secondary Education regulations are outside the jurisdiction of this office. See 603 C.M.R. 23.00. Given

Portia S. Bonner SPR26/1295 Page 4 April 16, 2026 that such issues do not fall within the authority of this office, I am unable to address such issues in this determination. Conclusion Accordingly, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. Ms. Shaw-Fischer is advised that she may wish to contact the Department Elementary and Secondary Education concerning these matters. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Jennifer Shaw-Fischer