November 18, 1997; Ramsey County
11/18/1997 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:For purposes of simplification, the information presented by the person who requested this opinion and the response from the government entity with which the person disagrees are presented in summary form. Copies of the complete submissions are on file at the offices of PIPA and, with the exception of any data classified as not public, are available for public access.On September 29, 1997, PIPA received a letter requesting this opinion from Eugene Begay. In that letter, Mr. Begay described his attempts to gain access to certain data maintained by the Ramsey County Sheriff's Office (RCSO). Mr. Begay enclosed copies of related correspondence. In response to Mr. Begay's request, PIPA, on behalf of the Commissioner, wrote to Bob Fletcher, Ramsey County Sheriff. The purposes of this letter, dated October 2, 1997, were to inform Mr. Fletcher of Mr. Begay's request, and to ask him or the County's attorney to provide information or support for its position. PIPA did not receive a response from the Sheriff. A summary of the detailed facts of this matter follows. In September 1995, Mr. Begay filed a complaint with the RCSO. According to Mr. Begay, his complaint was investigated during which numerous persons were interviewed. A portion of Mr. Begay's complaint was upheld. In June 1997, Mr. Begay wrote to Sheriff Fletcher and requested the release of any and all materials contained within the internal affairs case file related to the investigation of his complaint. In response, Mr. Begay received copies of: 1) his complaint; 2) a letter dated December 29, 1995, from Sheriff Fletcher to Mr. Begay; and 3) a letter dated December 29, 1995, from Sheriff Fletcher to the employee against whom part of Mr. Begay's complaint was upheld. Mr. Begay wrote to the Commissioner that he believes he is entitled to additional information (for example, any and all interviews conducted during the course of the internal affairs investigation) . . . . pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 13.43, subdivision 2 (5).
Issue:
In his request for an opinion, Mr. Begay asked the Commissioner to address the following issue:
Discussion:
Data about current and former employees of government entities such as the RCSO are classified according to Minnesota Statutes Section 13.43, which provides that certain data about employees are public, and all other personnel data are private.
Of relevance to this opinion, Section 13.43, subdivision 2 (a) (4) and (5), provide that the following data are public: the existence and status of any complaints or charges against the employee, regardless of whether the complaint or charge resulted in a disciplinary action; and the final disposition of any disciplinary action together with the specific reasons for the action and data documenting the basis of the action, excluding data that would identify confidential sources who are employees of the public body.
In relevant part, subdivision 2 (b) provides:
In response to Mr. Begay's request, he received three documents from Ramsey County: copies of 1) his complaint; 2) a letter dated December 29, 1995, from Sheriff Fletcher to Mr. Begay; and 3) a letter dated December 29, 1995, from Sheriff Fletcher to the employee. In his letter to Mr. Begay, Sheriff Fletcher wrote An investigation was conducted which included interviews with several Sheriff's department personnel. In his letter to the employee, Sheriff Fletcher wrote that a complaint was made against the employee, the complaint was investigated, and a portion of the complaint was sustained. Sheriff Fletcher wrote: Accordingly, I am sustaining Mr. Begay's complaint and issuing you a written reprimand which will be placed in your Sheriff's Department personnel file. Sheriff Fletcher provided Mr. Begay with a copy of the letter of reprimand he (Fletcher) sent to the employee. The letter contained information about why the employee was being disciplined, i.e., data which would not be available to Mr. Begay if there were no final disposition of the disciplinary action. Therefore, the Commissioner assumes that there has been a final disposition of the disciplinary action, within the meaning of Section 13.43, subdivision 2 (b). It is clear that disciplinary action, i.e., the letter of reprimand, has been imposed on the employee as a result of Mr. Begay's complaint, and that there has been a final disposition of the disciplinary action. Therefore, in accordance with Section 13.43, subdivision 2 (a) (5), any member of the public is entitled to gain access to the final disposition of any disciplinary action together with the specific reasons for the action and data documenting the basis of the action. Sheriff Fletcher referred to several interviews with other employees as part of the investigation into Mr. Begay's complaint. However, none of the data in those interviews was provided to Mr. Begay in response to his request for any and all materials contained within the internal affairs case file related to the investigation of his complaint. Mr. Begay was informed of the reasons for the disciplinary action, but not the data documenting the basis for the action. The RCSO should provide Mr. Begay with access to all data documenting the basis of the disciplinary action taken against the employee, excluding any data that identify confidential sources who are employees of the public body. Opinion:Based on the facts and information provided, my opinion on the issue raised by Mr. Begay is as follows:
Signed:
Elaine S. Hansen
Dated: November 18, 1997 |
Personnel data
Reprimand
