October 3, 1997; University of Minnesota
10/3/1997 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 August 9, 1997, PIPA received a fax dated same from Tom Lamphere. In his letter, Mr. Lamphere requested that the Commissioner issue an opinion regarding his access to data maintained by the University of Minnesota. PIPA, on behalf of the Commissioner, wrote to Tracy Smith, Associate General Counsel for the University, in response to Mr. Lamphere's request. The purposes of this letter, dated August 12, 1997, were to inform her of Mr. Lamphere's request and to ask her to provide information or support for the University's position. PIPA received a response dated August 21, 1997, from Ms. Smith. A summary of the facts is as follows. In a letter dated June 19, 1997, Mr. Lamphere requested access to certain data from the University. In a letter dated June 24, 1997, Mr. Lamphere made additions to and clarified his previous request for access to data. In a letter dated July 7, 1997, Judith Karon of the University sent Mr. Lamphere copies of some of the data he requested in his June 19 letter. She wrote, I will provide additional information as it becomes available. In a letter dated August 1, 1997, Mr. Lamphere wrote to Ms. Smith and stated, I am putting you on notice that if I don't have all the copies in my possession of all the public data that I requested in my June 19 and June 24, 1997 public data request by August 8, 1997, I will ask for an advisory opinion from the Department of Administration. Mr. Lamphere then requested an opinion in a letter dated August 9, 1997. He wrote, As of August 9, 1997, I have no response from Ms. Smith.
In a letter dated August 21, 1997, Ms. Smith responded on behalf of the University to Mr. Lamphere's request. She wrote:
Issue:
In his request for an opinion, Mr. Lamphere asked the Commissioner to address the following issue:
Discussion:
Minnesota Statutes Section 13.03 sets forth a government entity's obligations in responding to requests for access to public government data. Subdivision 2 of Section 13.03 provides that the entity must respond in an appropriate and prompt manner. Subdivision 3 of Section 13.03 provides that if the entity determines that the data are not accessible to the requestor, the responsible authority must so inform the requestor at the time of the request or as soon thereafter as possible. In addition, Minnesota Rules Section 1205.0300 provides that responses must be made within a reasonable time.
Mr. Lamphere requested access to data on two separate occasions. His June 19, 1997, letter contained six separate questions. He wrote in his opinion request, UMD's Judith Karon responded with a July 7, 1997 letter giving data for request #6 and partial data for request #4 of my June 19, 1997 letter. Ms. Karon responded further in a letter dated August 14, 1997. She wrote:
As stated above, Section 13.03 and Minnesota Rules Section 1205.0300 set forth the time frame within which a government entity must respond to requests for access to public data. In the present case, Mr. Lamphere requested data in a letter dated June 19, 1997. He did not receive a response from the University until sometime around July 7, 1997, and that response dealt with two of his six questions. The University did not respond to the remaining questions until August 14, 1997. Chapter 13 does not define prompt or reasonable. In the case of Mr. Lamphere's June 19, 1997, request, the University took approximately ten days to respond to numbers 4 and 6 of the request and took approximately two months to respond to the remaining questions. The Commissioner is of the opinion, in this particular situation, that per Chapter 13, while a response time of approximately ten working days may be acceptable, a response time of two months is not. Such a conclusion is more easily reached given that the University did not argue its need to take an extended time to respond. Regarding Mr. Lamphere's June 24, 1997, request for access to data, the issues raised by the University's response are essentially the same. The University's response, in a letter dated August 14, 1997, was issued approximately 7 weeks after the request had been made. Ms. Karon wrote, This letter is in response to your request for documents under [Chapter 13] dated June 24, 1997. The documents which are responsive to your request consist of 123 pages. You may call my office to arrange a mutually convenient time to view them and there will be no cost to you. Should you wish copies the cost for copying is... Again, the Commissioner is of the opinion that a response time of approximately 7 weeks is neither prompt nor reasonable. Therefore, the University did not respond within the time frame set forth in Section 13.03. Finally, in her response to Mr. Lamphere's opinion request, Ms. Smith wrote, As for Mr. Lamphere's statement that the University provided only a partial response to item No. 4 in his June 19 letter, University records show that in fact the University has provided all documents it has that are responsive to that request and informed Mr. Lamphere of Jim Malosky's salary. The University has responded fully to both requests. Based on the information provided, it is impossible for the Commissioner to determine whether the University has provided Mr. Lamphere with all the data he requested in both letters. Opinion:Based on the facts and information provided, my opinion on the issue raised by Mr. Lamphere is as follows:
Signed:
Elaine S. Hansen
Dated: October 3, 1997 |
Inspection
Reasonable time and place (1205.0300, subp. 3)
