← Back to Search
Mahler, Renee v. Department of Mental Health (SPR 20261388)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Public records appeal decision · Filed 04-14-2026
ClosedAppeal
SPR 20261388 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Mahler, Renee concerning records held by Department of Mental Health, opened 04-14-2026. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20261388
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Mahler, Renee
- Custodian
- Department of Mental Health
- Date Opened
- 04-14-2026
- Date Closed
- 04-27-2026
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 27, 2026 SPR26/1388 Olubunmi A. Olotu, Esq. Assistant General Counsel Department of Mental Health 25 Staniford Street Boston, MA 02114 Dear Attorney Olotu: I have received the petition of Renee Mahler appealing the response of the 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 March 13, 2026, Ms. Mahler requested “all current and historic records specific to my professional credentials at Worcester Recovery Center and Hospital since 2017[.]” Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR26/1143 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (April 1, 2026). In my April 1st determination, I ordered the Department to provide Ms. Mahler with a written response. Subsequently, the Department responded on April 6, 2026. Unsatisfied with the response, Ms. Mahler petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/1388, was opened as a result. Status of the Requestor 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, Ms. Mahler’s status shall have no bearing on the public status of any existing responsive records. 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. SPR26/1388 Page 2 April 27, 2026 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. 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. The Department’s April 6th Response In its April 6, 2026 response, the Department provided numerous records responsive to this request and stated, “[t]his request seeks information to which you have a unique right of access by other means. Accordingly, the records will be provided outside the Public Records process. DMH now considers this PRR closed.” Current Appeal In her appeal petition, Ms. Mahler states: I have a reasonable basis to believe that additional credentialing records exist. The records produced by DMH reflect that credentials are renewed on a two-year cycle. However, DMH produced only application materials and did not produce records reflecting actions taken on my credentials, such as approval, renewal, expiration, non-renewal, suspension, revocation, or any other action. Accordingly, there should reasonably be additional records, including records from 2023, relating to actions taken regarding my credentials. DMH also stated that it was exploring whether these records could be provided through another process because I may have a “unique right of access” outside the Public Records Law. However, DMH did not identify that process, did not direct me to use it, and ultimately provided records through the public records process in response to this appeal. Accordingly, I understand that DMH treated this as a Olubunmi A. Olotu, Esq. SPR26/1388 Page 3 April 27, 2026 public records request. If DMH believes that some or all responsive records should instead be provided through another process, I respectfully request that DMH be directed either to produce those records or to clearly identify the alternative process and specify which records, if any, are being withheld on that basis Additional Records The Department is advised that 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). Further, in accordance with the Public Records Law, custodians are expected to use their superior knowledge of the records in their custody to assist requestors in obtaining the desired information. See 950 C.M.R. 32.04(5). Based on Ms. Mahler’s appeal, it is unclear whether the Department possesses additional records responsive to the request. The Department must clarify this matter. 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 days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Renee Mahler