Law Enforcement Data Remote Workshop on Nov. 16 & 17
The Data Practices Office will be hosting a Law Enforcement Data Remote Workshop on Wednesday, November 16 and Thursday, November 17. The workshop will provide a primer (or refresher) about the key provisions in Minnesota law governing law enforcement data, including:
- Discussion of general legal requirements, including criminal investigative data, juvenile data, traffic accident data, body camera video data, and more;
- Real-life problem solving scenarios based on actual inquiries; and
- Time for questions and answers about the day-to-day issues that involve law enforcement data.
The workshop will be held remotely on WebEx during the mornings of November 16 and 17, and it will not require in-person attendance. The cost to attend this workshop is $250 per person, and participants must attend both morning sessions.
Registration information for this workshop is available on our website.
Intro to Data Practices Remote Workshop on December 15
The Data Practices Office will be hosting a remote Intro to Data Practices workshop on Thursday, December 15 that provides an overview of state and local governments' responsibilities under the Data Practices Act, including:
- Background on a government entity's legal duties related to government data;
- Advice on the legal requirements related to appropriate access to not public data and data breach investigations and notifications;
- Help creating or updating customized data practices policies and procedures required by law; and
- An opportunity to apply your knowledge in hands-on exercises.
This workshop will be held be held remotely on WebEx, and it does not require in-person attendance. The cost to attend this workshop is $125 per person.
More information about this workshop is available on our website.
Schedule of Upcoming Workshops
Can't make it to these upcoming workshops? Don't worry!
We've posted a tentative schedule of all our upcoming workshops through June 2023 on the Data Practices Office website.
Energy Policy Advocates v. Ellison, A20-1344 (Minn., Sep. 28, 2022)
Energy Policy Advocates requested certain correspondence from the Minnesota Attorney General (AGO). The AGO responded that there were not any public data responsive to the request and cited Minnesota Statutes, section 13.393, which governs attorney data, and later Minnesota Statutes, section 13.65, which classifies specific data maintained by the AGO as “private data on individuals.” The list of data in that section includes data of which an individual – a living human being – would not be the identifiable subject.
In reversing the Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court recognized the common-interest doctrine holding that the doctrine applies when (1) two or more parties, (2) represented by separate lawyers, (3) have a common legal interest (4) in a litigated or non-litigated matter, (5) the parties agree to exchange information concerning the matter, and (6) they make an otherwise privileged communication in furtherance of formulating a joint legal strategy. The Court cautioned that a purely commercial, political, or policy interest is insufficient for the common-interest doctrine to apply.
The Court also reversed the lower court to hold that the attorney-client privilege included inter-attorney communications that do not include a client, though the Court declined to describe “the precise circumstances in which internal communications within the Attorney General’s Office may be protected by the attorney-client privilege.” The Court maintained that the district court is the proper place for fact-finding on that issue.
Finally, in interpreting section 13.65, the Court held that the plain language of the provision – “the following data are private data on individuals” – meant that data in which an individual is not the identifiable subject would be classified as “private data on individuals” and therefore, not public.
The Court wrote: “At most, our decision recognizes a single, narrow exception to the statutory definition of "private data on individuals" for the specific, discrete subsets of Attorney General data listed in section 13.65, subdivision 1, with the general definition applicable in all other circumstances.”
The Commissioner of Administration has not issued any Advisory Opinions since the last FYi Newsletter.
|
