December 10, 2001; Dakota County Community Development Agency
12/10/2001 10:15:43 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 IPA and, except for any data that are not public, are available for public access. On October 31, 2001, IPA received an e-mail from Janet Shefchik, Personnel Officer for the Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA). In her e-mail, Ms. Shefchik asked about the classification of certain data that the County maintains. In a follow-up e-mail, Ms. Shefchik asked the Commissioner to issue an advisory opinion. A summary of the facts is as follows. In her October 31, 2001, e-mail, Ms. Shefchik wrote: In the process of evaluating a piece of land for purchase, the CDA had the soil tested for ground contamination. The soil test was paid for using federally funded Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) monies. In order to better understand the results of the test and possible ground contaminant findings, the CDA forwarded the test results to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (this was allowable under the purchase agreement). After learning more about what the results meant, the CDA ultimately elected not to purchase the property. Issue:In her request for an opinion, Ms. Shefchik asked the Commissioner to address the following issue:
Discussion:Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.03, subdivision 1, government data are public unless otherwise classified. In her e-mails, Ms. Shefchik asserted that the data in question are classified as not public pursuant to section 13.54, housing agency data. Subdivision 1 of section 13.54 defines housing agency as the public housing agency or housing and redevelopment authority of a political subdivision. Ms. Shefchik wrote: The CDA was previously the Dakota County Housing and Redevelopment Authority, we changed our name to the Dakota County CDA as of January 1, 2000. The CDA is really a combination of functions, including housing and redevelopment, and community/economic development. Ms. Shefchik pointed the Commissioner to Minnesota Statutes, section 383D.41. In part, subdivision 1 states: There is created in Dakota County a public body corporate and politic, to be known as the Dakota county community development agency, having all of the powers and duties of a housing and redevelopment authority under sections 469.001 to 469.047; and all powers and duties of a county housing and redevelopment authority under any other provisions of Minnesota law. Ms. Shefchik also referenced subdivision 7 of section 383D.41, which states in part: In addition to the other powers granted in this section, the Dakota county community development agency shall have the powers of an economic development authority under sections 469.090 to 469.1081... Based on the language in section 383D.41, it appears that data the County CDA maintains are classified pursuant to section 13.54. Subdivision 4 of section 13.54 classifies as nonpublic the following data not on individuals that a housing agency maintains: ...all data pertaining to negotiations with property owners regarding the purchase of property. With the exception of the housing agency's evaluation of properties not purchased, all other negotiation data shall be public at the time of the closing of the property sale. Ms. Shefchik wrote that the soil test was conducted as part of the County CDA's evaluation of whether or not to purchase a piece of land. As Ms. Shefchik noted, the County CDA ultimately did not purchase the property. The Commissioner's analysis is that the test data pertain to negotiations with property owners regarding the purchase of property. Therefore, the data are nonpublic. Opinion:Based on the facts and information provided, my opinion on the issue that Ms. Shefchik raised is as follows:
Signed:
David F. Fisher
Dated: December 10, 2001 |
Property Data
Housing agency data (13.54)
