Renee Mahler v. Department of Mental Health (SPR 20252152)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records July 29, 2025 SPR25/2152 Olubunmi A. Olotu, Esq. Massachusetts Department of Mental Health 25 Standiford Street Boston, MA 02114 Dear Attorney Olotu: I have received the petition of Renee Mahler appealing the response of the Massachusetts Department of Mental Health (Department) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On June 20, 2025, Ms. Mahler requested, “…the complete emails, including headers, body content, and attachments (if any) for each of the 344 entries listed in that document.” On June 20, 2025, Ms. Mahler narrowed her request stating, “[f]or this PRR, I’m glad to narrow the request to the emails between 7/1/23 and 6/30/24.” The Department responded on June 20, July 9, and July 16, 2025. Unsatisfied with the responses, Ms. Mahler petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/2152, 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. 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 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

Olubunmi A. Olotu, Esq. SPR25/2152 Page 2 July 29, 2025 redacted portion of the responsive record. If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. See 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. The Department’s June 20th, July 9th, and July 16th Responses On June 20, 2025, the Department stated, “…we ask again that you consider narrowing the timeline of your request down to one year, as opposed to the three years we have included in the results we provided to you in the form of a spreadsheet…” On July 9, 2025, the Department stated, “[w]e are waiting to hear back from custodians to produce this range of records. I will give you an update when we produce the records to you.” On July 16, 2025, the Department stated, “[c]ustodians of this record provided the records to us on Monday July 14, 2025…Please note that I have begun processing your request and will give you an update when we are closer to providing the records to you.” Current Appeal In her July 22, 2025 petition to this office, Ms. Mahler stated, “[w]hile I appreciate the polite acknowledgments and apologies I have received from DMH RAO, the delays continue without resolution or a timeline, and the agency is now well outside the statutory timeframe for response…” 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).

Olubunmi A. Olotu, Esq. SPR25/2152 Page 3 July 29, 2025 Where Ms. Mahler narrowed her request on June 20, 2025, and the Department has not provided the responsive records, I find the Department has not met its burden in responding to the Ms. Mahler’s request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Consequently, I find the Department must provide an estimated date as to when it intends to complete its review and provide the responsive records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided without unreasonable delay). Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Ms. Mahler 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. Ms. Mahler may appeal the substantive nature of the Department’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Renee Mahler