Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Woburn committee backs centralized public-records process after residents warn of added barriers
Loading...
Summary
The school committee reviewed a new centralized public-records request protocol that would route requests through a single form and address, with fees after two hours. Residents warned the form could require more personal data than state law requires; the district said centralization improves timeliness and tracking.
The Woburn School Committee on March 25 reviewed and generally supported a new centralized public-records request protocol aimed at ensuring timely, consistent responses, while residents urged safeguards to avoid creating unnecessary barriers.
Superintendent Dr. Crowley and Finance Director and public-records officer Alex Dizzio outlined the proposal: a single request email and Google form, a link to the Guide to Massachusetts Public Records Law, an option to receive materials by USPS when electronic delivery is not feasible, and a cost-estimate process allowing staff to tell requesters the expected hours to compile records. The policy specifies the first two hours of staff time for compiling records will be free; the district would charge $25 per hour thereafter plus copying fees.
Resident Rachel Kuberry, who spoke during public comment, said the draft procedure appeared to require private personal data that state law does not mandate and that it could place extra burdens on requesters. "The procedural change put forth by the superintendent adds barriers that are not required by law," she said, urging the committee to align the districts process with state and local requirements rather than making it more restrictive. Bernice Freeman, another speaker, asked for more public posting of documents such as the MSBA Statement of Interest.
Dizzio said the aim was administrative: requests arrive via different channels and at times are missed, which risks missing the statutory response window. He said the single form and a dedicated address (posted in the draft policy) would time-stamp requests and allow his office to triage them. He described including contact information fields so staff can communicate about delivery options and estimated fees, and noted the form includes a link to the Guide to Massachusetts Public Records Law for requesters.
Committee members pressed for privacy safeguards and clarity about which contact fields are mandatory. Several members asked for a pop-up notice or lawyer-approved blurb explaining how the district will use and protect personal information and whether contact fields can be optional when not necessary for fulfilling the request. Dizzio agreed to refine the form and the website placement to reduce friction while ensuring the office can meet statutory timelines.
The committee did not adopt a final policy at the meeting but directed staff to incorporate feedback and make the procedure available conspicuously on the district website. Next steps include revising the form for optional contact fields where possible, adding a privacy/usage notice, and re-posting a draft for public review before final adoption.
