May 11, 1995; Minnesota Department of Public Safety
5/11/1995 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 citizen who requested this opinion and the response from the government entity with which the citizen disagrees are presented in summary form. Copies of the complete submissions are on file at the offices of PIPA and are available for public access.On April 21, 1995, PIPA received a letter dated April 18, 1995, from Mark Anfinson, an attorney representing the Rochester Post-Bulletin. In his letter, Mr. Anfinson requested that the Commissioner issue an advisory opinion regarding the Post-Bulletin's dispute with the Minnesota Department of Public Safety (DPS) over access to data. In response to Mr. Anfinson's request, PIPA, on behalf of the Commissioner, wrote to Michael Jordan, Commissioner of Public Safety. The purposes of this letter, dated April 25, 1995, were to inform Mr. Jordan of Mr. Anfinson's request, to ask him or Public Safety's attorney to provide information or support for the Department's position, and to inform him of the date by which the Commissioner was required to issue this opinion. On April 3, 1995, Steven Alpert, Assistant Attorney General, contacted PIPA to request an additional day to respond to Mr. Anfinson's request. Mr. Alpert stated that the DPS and Mr. Anfinson were trying to reach an agreement. Mr. Alpert's request for additional time was granted. Apparently, no agreement was reached because on April 4, 1995, PIPA received a FAXed response from Mr. Alpert. A summary of the detailed facts surrounding Mr. Anfinson's request is as follows. According to Mr. Anfinson, the Post-Bulletin recently requested certain data, in computer format, from the DPS relating to vehicle accidents in nine southeastern Minnesota counties. The Post-Bulletin is seeking the following specific information: date, time, and specific location (including county) of accident type of vehicle road conditions whether alcohol was involved and with which vehicle whether victim was ejected whether victim was wearing a seatbelt what agency handled the scene report any other items of public data in the database Mr. Anfinson noted the Post-Bulletin had been informed by the DPS that this information is stored electronically for all years back to 1981. However, Mr. Anfinson also noted that the DPS refuses to provide the requested information to the Post-Bulletin and has given no reasons for this position. In his response, Mr. Alpert stated that the information contained on disk which is collected and stored by the DPS is obtained from law enforcement under Minnesota Statutes Section 169.09, subdivision 8, pursuant to federal and state law. Mr. Alpert also stated that, ...While the information being sought may be maintained by both Driver and Vehicle Services [of the DPS], the Department is precluded from releasing the information to the Rochester paper as it is classified as confidential pursuant to Minn. Stat. section 169.09, subd. 13, as well as 23 U.S.C. section 409. Mr. Alpert asserts that, ...Under Minn Stat. section 13.82, subd. 3 or 4, the request may be, and should be, made to law enforcement agencies--agencies which carry on a law enforcement function....
Issue:
In his request for an opinion, Mr. Anfinson asked the Commissioner to address the following issue:
Discussion:
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 169.09, subdivision 8, all law enforcement officers who, in the regular course of duty, investigate a motor vehicle accident which results in bodily injury to or death of any person or total property damage to an apparent extent of $1,000 or more, must forward a written report of such an accident, within ten days thereof, to the Commissioner of Public Safety. To assist in this process, the DPS prepares and supplies to law enforcement agencies, proper accident report forms. As necessary, law enforcement officers fill out the forms and forward them to the DPS. It is certain data on these forms that the Post-Bulletin is seeking.
Most of the data sought by the Post Bulletin are classified as public, pursuant to Section 13.82, subdivisions 3 and 4, when the data are stored in the particular law enforcement agency that created or collected the data. For example, if the City of Winona Police Department responded to a call relating to a traffic accident, certain data (as specified in Section 13.82, subdivisions 3 and 4) regarding that incident are public in the Winona Police Department. Mr. Anfinson's question is whether these same data are also public on the accident report forms maintained at the DPS. In his response, Mr. Alpert argues that the data sought by the Post Bulletin are not public because those data are classified as confidential pursuant to Section 169.09, subdivision 13, as well as to 23 U.S.C. section 409. Upon a close examination of Section 169.09, subdivision 13, it appears this section sets forth the premise that all written reports and supplemental reports required under Section 169.09 are confidential. Section 169.09, subdivision 13 (a), states, ...[reports] shall be for the use of the commissioner of public safety and other appropriate state, federal, county, and municipal governmental agencies for accident analysis purposes.... Mr. Alpert also specifically mentions two additional provisions, one in Section 169.09 and the other in federal law, which he argues have the effect of classifying the accident reports as confidential. Section 169.09, subdivision 13 (b), states, Accident reports and data contained in the reports shall not be discoverable under any provision of law or rule of court.... Section 409 of 23 U.S.C., states, Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data compiled for the purpose of identifying, evaluating, or planning the safety enhancement of potential accident sites, hazardous roadway conditions, or railway-highway crossings...shall not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding....
The Commissioner did address a somewhat similar issue in Advisory Opinion # 94-015. In said opinion, the opinion requester was seeking response or incident data and request for service data from a law enforcement agency. The law enforcement agency refused to release the data based on an argument that those same data had also been collected by the Commissioner of Health, in reports where the data were clearly classified as private data. The Commissioner wrote:
Similarly, in this situation, there is no question that data classified as public pursuant to Section 13.82, subdivisions 3 and 4, are public in the law enforcement agency in which those data are collected, received, and maintained. In addition, it appears that those same data are classified as confidential pursuant to Section 169.09, subdivision 13, when the data exist on accident report forms (filed pursuant to Section 169.09) which are received and maintained by the DPS. In summation, the data classified as confidential by Section 169.09 are the contents of the accidents reports. However, the fact that the reports contain data otherwise classified as public does not change the classification of the source data. Nothing in Section 169.09 prevents the Post-Bulletin from obtaining the request for service and response or incident data from the individual law enforcement agencies in which those data are maintained. Opinion:Based on the correspondence in this matter, my opinion on the issue raised by Mr. Anfinson is as follows:
Signed:
Elaine S. Hansen
Dated: May 11, 1995
|
Law enforcement data
Traffic accidents (169.09)
