Facts and Procedural History:

KARE requested that the City provide it with access to data concerning the City's sale of confiscated firearms to licensed gun dealers. According to Mr. Kupchella, KARE was specifically trying to get access to data that would indicate what items were sold, the prices and the purchasers. Mr. Kupchella stated that the request was denied and the City cited Minnesota Statutes Section 13.36 as the basis for classifying the requested data as private.

Mr. Kupchella quoted Section 13.36 and then discussed his understanding that the City interpreted this provision to mean that all data maintained by the City concerning the purchase or transfer of firearms and applications for permits to carry firearms are classified as private data. Mr. Kupchella then attacked the City's position on the basis of grammatical interpretation, on the basis that such an interpretation would classify much more data as private than the actual language of the section, on the basis that the data in question were not collected pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 624.712 through 624.719, which is cross referenced in Section 13.36, and on the basis of public policy. Mr. Kupchella then asked for a Commissioner's opinion on the issue stated in the Issue section below.

In response to Mr. Kupchella's request, PIPA, on behalf of the Commissioner, wrote to Mr. Jim Moore in the Office of the Minneapolis City Attorney. Mr. Moore handles data practices issues for the City. The purposes of this letter, dated July 22, 1994, were to inform Mr. Moore of Mr. Kupchella's request, to ask Mr. Moore to provide any information or support for the City's position and to inform him of the date by which the Commissioner was required to issue this opinion.

On August 3, 1994, by facsimile transmission, PIPA received a response from Mr. Moore. He provided the explanations and arguments summarized below and provided copies of sample documentation kept by the City concerning the sale of confiscated firearms. Mr. Moore summarized the position of the City as follows.

After stating the City's disagreement with Mr. Kupchella's description of the facts at issue, Mr. Moore explained that the City does maintain some records concerning the sale of confiscated firearms sold at three different sales conducted in 1987, 1988 and 1989. The firearms were sold at auctions conducted by a private auction firm hired by the City. The City ceased the sales after the 1989 sale.

Although the records of the sales vary from year to year, the City generally has:

1. a list of the weapons by type, serial number and description of the incidents leading to the seizure; and
   
2. the auctioneer receipt that contains the sale price and a random number assigned by the auction company identifying the federally licensed purchaser of the confiscated weapon.

   The 1988 and 1989 records include copies of the federal firearms licenses of the individuals who attended the sales but do not include a cross reference to any firearm they may have purchased. The actual record of who bought what may be held by the auction company but the City does not know if that is the case. Mr. Moore provided copies of the documents he described.

   Mr. Moore agreed that KARE's request was preliminarily denied on the basis of Minnesota Statutes Section 13.36. After discussions with an attorney for KARE, Mr. Moore offered to provide KARE with a list of weapons sold by type with their serial numbers and the sale price. KARE's attorney responded that those data would not be adequate.

   Although it is the City's position that City records do not identify the purchaser, the City maintains that the release of unexpurgated files relating to the auctions could lead to identifying purchasers. Therefore, the City takes the position that these data constitute data on individuals as defined in the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, hereinafter Act or Chapter 13. If indeed the data are data on individuals, then the City takes the position that the data in question are classified as private by Minnesota Statutes Section 13.36. Mr. Moore then offered detailed arguments in opposition to some of the arguments offered by Mr. Kupchella.

   Lastly, Mr. Moore quoted Section 13.36 and discussed his view as to why the cross reference to Minnesota Statutes Sections 624.712 through 624.719, which is contained in Section 13.36, should not be read as limiting the application of Section 13.36 to data collected or maintained only for purposes of the administration of Chapter 624. It was his position that a reading of Section 13.36 as relating only to the protection of data concerning firearms transactions under Chapter 624 would produce an absurd result.

Issue:

Discussion:

The City's position is that it does not maintain the data actually being sought by KARE 11, i.e. what firearm was sold, at what price and to whom. The City states that the sale was conducted by the auction company and the company provided limited data to the City. The City holds out the possibility that the auction company may be maintaining the data sought by KARE 11. It may be possible, depending on the content of the contract entered into by the City and the auction company and what data about the sale is actually held by the auction company, that data identifying the actual purchaser and what was purchased may be government data within the meaning of the Act under the rule set down in the Pathmanathan case.

In that case, a government entity contracted with a private investigation to do work for it but provided in the contract that the work product of the contractor would be owned by the government entity. (See Pathmanathan v. St. Cloud State University, 461 N.W. 2d 726 (Minn. Ct. App.1990)). However, even if the City's contract with the auction company contained similar language and the data were retrievable from the auction company, the City's position on the data generated by the sale is that any data that identify or could identify purchasers and transferees of confiscated firearms sold by the City are private data pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 13.36.

Minnesota Statutes Section 13.36 reads as follows:

It is very clear from the plain words of this section that the data classified by it are not all data concerning the purchase or transfer of firearms or permits to carry firearms, but only data collected by a government entity . . . pursuant to sections 624.712 to 624.719 . . . The legislature did not, in Section 13.36, classify all data about firearms transactions maintained by government agencies as private. It classified as private only the data on individuals collected by government entities in their administration of the statutory sections that regulate certain transactions involving the purchase and transfer of certain kinds of firearms and applications for permits to carry certain kinds of firearms.

Minnesota Statutes Sections 624.712 to 624.719, hereinafter referred to as Chapter 624 , is sometimes referred to as the gun control statute. Under the terms of Chapter 624 certain classes of persons are disqualified from acquiring certain types of firearms. To enforce that disqualification, persons who are prospective transferees or transferrors of firearms are required to provide certain data to law enforcement agencies. The law enforcement agency then makes a determination as to whether the proposed transferee is disqualified from acquiring the firearms regulated by Chapter 624. Under Chapter 624, law enforcement agencies also receive applications and make decisions about whether persons can carry firearms in a concealed fashion.

It is the data collected and maintained by law enforcement agencies for the purpose of the administration of Chapter 624 that are classified as private by Minnesota Statutes Section 13.36. Data concerning the transactions in which the City auctioned off confiscated firearms of various types are not data collected and maintained for the purpose of the administration of Chapter 624. As there appears to be no other section classifying these data as not public, the data in question, to the extent that they are maintained by the City or are retrievable from the company that conducted the auctions for the City, are public data pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 13.03, subdivision 1.

Opinion: