Advisory Opinion 02-007
March 11, 2002; School District 276 (Minnetonka)
Background & Issues
A member of the public requested public personnel records for an employee from the Minnetonka School District, but district officials claimed the data was private and never followed up after promising to review the request. He asked whether the school district responded appropriately to his request for public employee data.
Commissioner Decision
The Commissioner determined that the school district did not respond appropriately to the request.
Automated synopsis generated for quick reference only — it has not been reviewed word-for-word against the official record and is not legal advice. Always review the full opinion text below for the Commissioner's actual determination, or see the original document on mn.gov. Think this summary misstates the opinion? Report it.
Excerpted Ruling / ConclusionBased on the facts and information provided, my opinion on the issue that Mr. Herbst raised is as follows:
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, School District 276, Minnetonka, did not respond appropriately to a January 11, 2002, request for access to public data about a District employee.
March 11, 2002; School District 276 (Minnetonka)
3/11/2002 10:14:43 AM
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to section 13.072 of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13 - the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. It is based on the facts and information available to the Commissioner as described below.
Facts and Procedural History:On February 7, 2002, the Information Policy Analysis Division (IPAD) received a letter, dated same, from Mike Herbst. In his letter, Mr. Herbst asked the Commissioner to issue an opinion regarding his access to certain data that School District 276, Minnetonka, maintains. IPA, on behalf of the Commissioner, wrote to Dennis Peterson, Superintendent of the District, in response to Mr. Herbst's request. The purposes of this letter, dated February 8, 2002, were to inform him of Mr. Herbst's request and to ask him to provide information or support for the District's position. On February 20, 2002, IPAD received a response, dated February 19, 2002, from Mark Wolak, the District's Assistant Superintendent for Administration and Accountability. A summary of the facts as Mr. Herbst presented them is as follows. In his opinion request, Mr. Herbst wrote that on January 10, 2002, he submitted to Mr. Wolak a request to view all public data allowed by MN chapter 13.43 of [a District employee's] personnel file, a [sic] employee of district 276. Mr. Herbst stated, As a response to this request they indicted [sic] that the information was private. Mr. Herbst wrote that he then resubmitted his request in a letter dated January 11, 2002. In that letter he stated, I request to review and all data/documentation pertaining to the following: All public data from the personnel file of [a District employee]. In his opinion request, Mr. Herbst further wrote: A meeting was then held on 1/15/02 to go over the data request with [Dr. Wolak]. At that meeting I was told that he (Dr. Wolak) was just appointed as the responsible authority, and the School Board has not established a policy on data practices. A determination of what was going to be released was to be done by Dr. Mike Lovett (Asst. Supt. of Human Resources), and I would be contacted. Mr. Herbst added, To date I have not been contacted by either the responsible authority or Dr. Mike Lovett. Issue:In his request for an opinion, Mr. Herbst asked the Commissioner to address the following issue:
Discussion:Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.03, and Minnesota Rules, Part 1205.0300, when an individual makes a request for public data of which the requestor is not the subject, the government entity must respond in a prompt and appropriate manner, and within a reasonable time, respectively. Pursuant to section 13.43, certain data about employees are public. In the case of this opinion, Mr. Herbst made a request for public data on January 10 and 11, 2002. According to Mr. Herbst, the District's initial response was that the data were private. Shortly thereafter, on January 15, 2002, Mr. Wolak informed Mr. Herbst that the District needed to determine the classification of the data and that District staff would then contact Mr. Herbst. As of the date Mr. Herbst requested this opinion, February 7, 2002, he had not received any data from the District. In his response, Dr. Wolak wrote that he did ask the Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources to prepare the response to Mr. Herbst's request. Information Dr. Wolak submitted indicates that the District faxed its response to Mr. Herbst on February 19, 2002. As stated above, pursuant to section 13.03, government entities must respond to requests for access to data promptly, appropriately, and within in a reasonable time. Here, it took the District almost six weeks to provide Mr. Herbst with data he requested. This is not prompt, appropriate, or within a reasonable time. Therefore, the District did not respond appropriately, i.e., in this case, within the statutory time frame. Opinion:Based on the facts and information provided, my opinion on the issue that Mr. Herbst raised is as follows:
Signed:
David F. Fisher
Dated: March 11, 2002 |