Jonathan Gerhardson v. Department of Public Health (SPR 20252912)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records October 20, 2025 SPR25/2912 Helen Rush-Lloyd Records Access Officer Department of Public Health 250 Washington Street, Second Floor Boston, MA 02108 Dear Ms. Rush-Lloyd: I have received the petition of Jonathan Gerhardson appealing the response of the Department of Public Health (Department) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On August 27, 2025, Mr. Gerhardson requested the following records: [1] All completed grant applications submitted to the RIZE Massachusetts Foundation for the Mosaic Opioid Recovery Partnership’s Community-based Opioid Response Efforts (CORE) grant program, which had a submission deadline of June 14, 2024. [2] This request includes all applications received for that grant round, regardless of whether a grant was ultimately awarded to the applicant. [3] All completed grant applications submitted to the RIZE Massachusetts Foundation for the Mosaic Opioid Recovery Partnership’s Municipal Matching Grant Program, which had a submission deadline of November 15, 2024. [4] All attachments submitted with the aforementioned applications, including but not limited to the required “proof of municipal support” documents, such as formal recorded budget discussions, commitment letters signed by a mayor or city/town manager, and joint letters from Opioid Abatement Collaboratives (OACs). [5] All completed grant applications submitted to the RIZE Massachusetts Foundation for the Family Resilience Grant: Supporting Children and Families Impacted by the Opioid Crisis program, which had a submission deadline of June 17, 2025. [6] All required attachments submitted with the aforementioned applications, including but not limited to: [t]he detailed budget and budget narrative for each project [and] [e]ach applicant organization’s most recent Audited Financial 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

Helen Rush-Lloyd SPR25/2912 Page 2 October 20, 2025 Statement or Financial Review. [7] This request includes all applications and their corresponding attachments received for that grant round, regardless of whether a grant was ultimately awarded to the applicant. The Department responded on August 27, 2025, September 5, 2025, and September 18, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Department’s responses, Mr. Gerhardson petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2912, was opened as a result. 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. Att’y 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. Current appeal In his October 3, 2025 appeal, Mr. Gerhardson states, “I have grounds to ask for this appeal at this time because it has been longer than 10 business days since my request, to my knowledge DPH has not petitioned your office for an extension, and today is the date they said they intended to produce records.” The Department’s, August 27th, September 5th, September 18th responses In its August 27, 2025 response, the Department stated, “[y]our records request has been received and is in process. Both requests were assigned one tracking number BSAS-2025-61.” In its September 5, 2025 response, the Department asserted, “[d]ue to the volume of materials and need for review, we are requesting a rolling production and an extension to 9/26/2025.”

Helen Rush-Lloyd SPR25/2912 Page 3 October 20, 2025 In its September 18, 2025 response, the Department stated, “[d]ue to the volume of materials in this production, we are requesti[ng] one more extension to 10/3/2025.... It is always your right to appeal but I can assure you we are not deleting your requested materials. The number of pages is in the thousands, and the redactions need to be reviewed.” Timeliness in providing records G. L. c. 66, § 10(b) provides, in pertinent part, that if the magnitude or difficulty of the request unduly burdens the other responsibilities of the agency or municipality such that the agency or municipality cannot provide records within 10 business days, the agency or municipality must inform the requestor in writing within 10 business days. With respect to the timeframe to produce responsive records, the written response shall: identify a reasonable timeframe in which the agency or municipality shall produce the public records sought; provided, that for an agency, the timeframe shall not exceed 15 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records and for a municipality the timeframe shall not exceed 25 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records; and provided further, that the requestor may voluntarily agree to a response date beyond the timeframes set forth herein. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Where Mr. Gerhardson’s request was originally submitted on August 27, 2025, and the Department has not provided the responsive records, I find the Department has not met its burden in responding to the request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Accordingly, I find the Department must provide an estimated date as to when it expects to complete its review and provide any responsive records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the Department must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. Gerhardson 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. Gerhardson may appeal the substantive nature of the Department’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1).

Helen Rush-Lloyd SPR25/2912 Page 4 October 20, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Jonathan Gerhardson