Mike Ruppel v. Executive Office of Health and Human Services - MassHealth Privacy Office (SPR 20252569)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records September 11, 2025 SPR25/2569 Berlinda Bernard Records Access Officer Executive Office of Health and Humans Services One Ashburton Place, Room 1109 Boston, MA 02108 Dear Ms. Bernard: I have received the petition of Mike Ruppel appealing the response of the Executive Office of Health and Human Services (Office) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On August 15, 2025, Mr. Ruppel requested, “[his] entire case file in preparation for an appeal / hearing.” The Office responded on August 22, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Office’s response, Mr. Ruppel petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2569, was opened as a result. While this appeal was pending, the Office provided a supplemental response on September 3, 2025. 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. 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

Berlinda Bernard SPR25/2569 Page 2 September 11, 2025 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. Status of the Requestor; Reason for the Request Please note that the reason for which a requestor seeks access to or a copy of a public record does not afford any greater right of access to the requested information than other persons in the general public. The Public Records Law does not distinguish between requestors. Access to a record pursuant to the Public Records Law rests on the content of the record and not the circumstances of the requestor. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); see also Bougas v. Chief of Police of Lexington, 371 Mass. 59, 64 (1976). Accordingly, Mr. Ruppel’s interest in obtaining the records shall have no bearing on the public status of the responsive records. It is unclear if Mr. Ruppel may have a greater right of access to the responsive records outside the Public Records Law. The parties are encouraged to communicate to determine if there is another means affording Mr. Ruppel a greater right of access to the responsive records. The Office’s August 22nd Response In its August 22, 2025 response, the Office stated, “[p]lease be advised that the MassHealth Privacy Office does not have access to MassHealth Board of Hearing appeal records. Contact the MassHealth Enrollment Center where the appeal will be held to make an appointment to view your appeal case file.” Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Ruppel stated, “I am appealing because I have a right to my MassHealth ‘Member Records’ and have been inappropriately denied such.” In an email to this office on September 3, 2025, the Office stated, “[p]lease note, Mr. Ruppel had not filed a public records request with EOHHS. He filed a request with the MassHealth privacy office for his own board of hearing appeal records. The MassHealth office directed him to contact the MassHealth Enrollment Center… EOHHS respectfully requests your office dismiss this appeal.” No Duty to Create Records Please be advised, under the Public Records Law a custodian is not required to create a record in response to a public records request. See G. L. c. 66, § 6A(d). In addition, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). Further, the duty to comply with requests for records extends to those records that exist and are in the possession, custody, or control of the custodian of records at the time of the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(ii). Also, the duty to comply with requests for records extends to identifying the agency or municipality

Berlinda Bernard SPR25/2569 Page 3 September 11, 2025 that may be in possession, custody, or control of the public record sought, if known. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iii). Where the Office has indicated it does not possess the records responsive to the request, and has identified the custodian that may have possession of the responsive records, I find the Office has met its burden in responding to this request. Mr. Ruppel may wish to submit a public records request to the MassHealth Enrollment Center for the records sought. Conclusion Accordingly, I will consider this administrative appeal closed. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Mike Ruppel