Dias, Collin v. Fall River, City of - Public Schools (SPR 20261468)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 28, 2026 SPR26/1468 Debra Cabral Administrative Assistant to the School Committee Fall River Public Schools 417 Rock Street Fall River, MA 02720 Dear Ms. Cabral: I have received the petition of Collin Dias appealing the response of the Fall River 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 14, 2026, Mr. Dias requested “all emails sent by [an identified individual] to [an identified individual] … from January 1st, 2008 until December 31st, 2016.” The School initially responded on March 30, 2026, providing a fee estimate. Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR26/1161 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (April 8, 2026). In my April 8th determination, I ordered the School to revise its fee estimate or provide further explanation of how the fee estimate of $842.50 is consistent with G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). The School responded on April 8, 2026. Unsatisfied with the School’s response, Mr. Dias petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/1468, was opened as a result. Fee Estimates – Municipalities A municipality may assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record except those records that are freely available for public inspection. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). The fees must reflect the actual cost of complying with a particular request. Id. A maximum fee of five cents ($.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, 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

Debra Cabral SPR26/1468 Page 2 April 28, 2026 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 March 30th and April 8th Responses In its March 30, 2026 response, the School provided a fee estimate of $842.50 to produce the responsive records. In support of its fee estimate, the School provided the following information: The request, as written, encompasses approximately 1,072 responsive emails, many of which contain personally identifiable information of public school students, which will need to be redacted pursuant to M.G.L. c. 4, § 7(26)(a), because personally identifiable information in education records/student records is specifically exempted from disclosure pursuant to several statutes, including: the Family and Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA); the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); M.G.L. c. 71B; M.G.L. c. 71, § 34D. Additionally, the District will redact or withhold those documents or portions of those documents that are exempt from disclosure because they contain material, “relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy.” M.G.L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c). The District will redact the documents responsive to your request to ensure the removal of any personally identifiable information so that the confidentiality of students is protected in a manner consistent with the above-referenced statutes and regulations as well as Champa v. Weston Public School, 473 Mass. 86 (2015). Provided herein is a good faith estimate of the time and cost it will take to search and segregate the information contained therein. In total, the District has estimated that it would take 35.71 hours of employee time to search, segregate, and redact responsive records. In accordance with 950 CMR 32.07(2)(m), this estimate of 35.7 hours of employee time at $25.00 per hour excluding the first two (2) hours of employee time, totaling $842.50 to redact the records responsive to this request… To the extent that any of the responsive documents contain the home address, personal email address, and personal telephone number of any Fall River Public School employees, they will be redacted in accordance with M.G.L. c. 4, § 7(26)(o).

Debra Cabral SPR26/1468 Page 3 April 28, 2026 In its April 8, 2026 response, the School added: Based on a detailed review of approximately 1,072 emails, the content is primarily comprised of communications from the former School Committee member to the former Superintendent. Many emails reflect the Committee member’s position as Vice Chair, resulting in frequent communications with the Superintendent regarding operational and administrative matters, including concerns raised by parents. Key observations include:  A substantial portion of emails involves forwarding or summarizing communications received from parents;  Many emails concern student-related matters, including requests for administrative attention or updates;  The Committee member frequently inquired about the status of concerns or actions related to these matters;  Overall, the emails focus on operational, administrative, and constituent- related issues rather than broader policy discussions. As discussed in the District’s response, a substantial portion of these emails contain information subject to statutory exemptions, including personally identifiable student and parent information, confidential information, and other privileged content… Each email must be segregated and subsequently redacted in accordance with G.L. c. 4 § 7(26) or other legally applicable privileges. The District included its estimated rate in its initial response, conservatively assuming an average review and redaction time of approximately two (2) minutes per email, reflecting the varying intensity and complexity of redactions required. This rate equates to approximately thirty (30) emails per hour… Applying this conservative review rate to approximately one thousand seventy-two (1,072) emails, the District estimated approximately 35.7 hours of employee time would be required to complete the review and redaction process… Consistent with G.L. c. 66 § l0(d)(iii), the District excluded the first two (2) hours of employee time. The remaining 33.7 hours were calculated at $25.00 per hour, which is equal to or less than the hourly rate of the lowest-paid District employee with the requisite skill to perform the search, review, and redaction of the requested records. Total Fee Estimate: (35.7-2) hours x $25.00 per hour= $842.50 This estimate was calculated in good faith, reflects a conservative assessment of the time required. It does not account for the full amount of time that may ultimately be necessary to complete a thorough line-by-line review and redaction of each responsive email. The estimate was intentionally calculated conservatively to facilitate public access to records while ensuring compliance with applicable legal exemptions… [T]he District has provided a detailed

Debra Cabral SPR26/1468 Page 4 April 28, 2026 explanation demonstrating that its fee estimate of $842.50 was calculated in good faith and is reasonable and consistent with G.L. c. 66 § 10(d) and the applicable regulations. Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Dias stated, “[t]he fee itself was made in bad faith. The district did not demonstrate how there is a requirement by law to redact the records.” Fee Waivers G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(v) provides the following with respect to waiving a fee for the production of responsive records: the records access officer may waive or reduce the amount of any fee charged under this subsection upon a showing that disclosure of a requested record is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the government and is not primarily in the commercial interest of the requestor, or upon a showing that the requestor lacks the financial ability to pay the full amount of the reasonable fee. Please be advised, although the Supervisor may encourage fees to be waived, the Supervisor may not mandate that a records access officer waive fees assessed for complying with a public records request; rather, as described above, the records access officer may waive or reduce the amount of any fee upon a showing of various factors. See G. L. c. 66, § 10 (d)(v); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2)(k). Reasonableness of the Fee Estimate Although the School maintains that it would take 35.7 hours to produce the responsive records, it remains unclear why the School requires this much time. In this case, it appears the School is not charging for search time and stated that it requires two minutes per each of the 1,072 responsive emails for review and redaction. However, pursuant to the Public Records Law, a fee may 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)(ii); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). Accordingly, where no such petition has been approved, the School’s fee estimate may not include time spent for segregation and redaction under Exemptions (c) and (o) of the Public Records Law, which are not “required by law.” The School may, however, assess a fee to segregate and redact the responsive records under the applicable statutes it identified under Exemption (a). Consequently, the School must provide further details regarding its fee estimate. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv) (requiring the amount of the fee be reasonable).

Debra Cabral SPR26/1468 Page 5 April 28, 2026 For the reasons discussed above, I find the School must revise its fee estimate or provide further explanation of how the fee estimate of $842.50 is consistent with G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). This office encourages Mr. Dias and the School to communicate to facilitate providing records more efficiently and affordably. Mr. Dias may wish to narrow the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vii) (a municipality shall suggest a reasonable modification of the scope of the request or offer to assist the requestor to modify the scope of the request if doing so would enable the municipality to produce the records sought more efficiently and affordably). Any revision to the request would result in the requirement to issue a revised fee estimate. Conclusion Accordingly, the School is ordered to provide Mr. Dias 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. Mr. Dias may 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: Collin Dias