Primary navigation

    Opinion Library

    To return to this list after selecting an opinion, click on the "View entire list" link above the opinion title.

    RSS feed

    Advisory Opinion 95-034

    July 27, 1995; Douglas County

    7/27/1995 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 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 July 10, 1995, PIPA received a letter dated July 3, 1995, from Mark Anfinson, on behalf of the Echo Press. In his letter, Mr. Anfinson requested that the Commissioner issue an advisory opinion regarding the Echo's dispute with the Douglas County Housing and Redevelopment Authority over access to certain personnel data.

    In response to the Mr. Anfinson's request, PIPA, on behalf of the Commissioner, wrote to Carol Meyer, Chair of the Douglas County Housing and Redevelopment Authority, hereafter HRA. The purposes of this letter, dated July 12, 1995, were to inform Ms. Meyer of Mr. Anfinson's request, to ask her or the HRA's attorney to provide information or support for the HRA's position, and to inform her of the date by which the Commissioner was required to issue this opinion.

    On July 20, 1995, PIPA received a letter from Ms. Meyer requesting that the Commissioner wait an additional 30 days before issuing an opinion. She asked for the extension so that officials of HUD could complete certain processes in regard to the employee.

    In a letter dated July 21, 1995, Don Gemberling, Director of PIPA, responded to Ms. Meyer's letter by stating, in part, The basis you describe in your request for an extension is not, in our opinion, one of the circumstances that is contemplated by the opinion statute. For that reason, we are denying your request...However, you still have the opportunity to present the commissioner with information that the HUD sanction process that you described in your letter or something else about this situation somehow affects the classification of the data your agency is maintaining about [the employee]. PIPA did not receive an additional response from the HRA.

    A summary of the detailed facts surrounding this issue is as follows. Apparently, the HRA recently fired an employee. According to Mr. Anfinson, shortly thereafter, the Echo requested access to the public data relating to the disciplinary action. Mr. Anfinson related that the HRA had refused to provide the data, despite his follow-up written request, dated June 15, 1995. (Mr. Anfinson provided a copy of this letter to PIPA.) Based on the refusal of the HRA to provide access to the data, Mr. Anfinson requested an advisory opinion.


    Issues:

    In his request for an opinion, Mr. Anfinson asked the Commissioner to address the following issues:

    1. What data about former public employees are public?

    2. If disciplinary action has been taken against a public employee, are the following data relating to the disciplinary action public: specific reasons for the action and data documenting the basis of the action?


    Discussion:

    Mr. Anfinson, on behalf of the Echo, requested an advisory opinion from the Commissioner because the newspaper has experienced difficulty obtaining certain government data from the HRA.

    The Echo seeks data relating to a former employee of the HRA. Such data are classified in Minnesota Statutes Section 13.43, personnel data: As used in this section, 'personnel data' means data on individuals collected because the individual is or wasan employee of or an applicant for employment by, performs services on a voluntary basis for, or acts as an independent contractor with a state agency, statewide system or political subdivision or is a member of or an applicant for an advisory board or commission. (Emphasis added.)

    Pursuant to Section 13.43, subdivision 2 (a), certain data about former employees are public:

    Except for employees described in subdivision 5, the following personnel data on current and former employees, volunteers, and independent contractors of a state agency, statewide system, or political subdivision and members of advisory boards or commissions is public: name; actual gross salary; salary range; contract fees; actual gross pension; the value and nature of employer paid fringe benefits; the basis for and the amount of any added remuneration, including expense reimbursement, in addition to salary; job title; job description; education and training background; previous work experience; date of first and last employment; the existence and status of any complaints or charges against the employee, whether or not the complaint or charge resulted in a disciplinary action; 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; the terms of any agreement settling any dispute arising out of the employment relationship; work location; a work telephone number; badge number; honors and awards received; payroll time sheets or other comparable data that are only used to account for employee's work time for payroll purposes, except to the extent that release of time sheet data would reveal the employee's reasons for the use of sick or other medical leave or other not public data; and city and county of residence. (Emphasis added.)

    Section 13.43, subdivision 2 (a), clearly states that when a final disposition of any disciplinary action has occurred, the final disposition is public as well as the specific reasons for the action and any data documenting the action. A final disposition, as clarified in Section 13.43, subdivision 2 (b), occurs when a state agency, statewide system, or political subdivision makes its final decision about the disciplinary action, regardless of the possibility of any later proceedings or court proceedings. In the present situation, there appears to be no dispute that the HRA, in terminating the employee, has arrived at a final disposition. Therefore, the final disposition of any disciplinary action (the termination) together with the specific reasons for the action and data documenting the action are public data. In addition, any other data about the employee that are consistent with the elements in Section 13.43, subdivision 2, are public data.

    Opinion:


    Based on the correspondence in this matter, my opinion on the issues raised by Mr. Anfinson are as follows:

    1. Section 13.43, subdivision 2, specifies which data about former public employees are public.

    2. The HRA appears to have made a final disposition in terminating its employee. Therefore, the specific reasons for the disciplinary action and data documenting the basis of the action, excluding data that would identify confidential sources who are employees of the public body, are public data.

    Signed:

    Elaine S. Hansen
    Commissioner

    Dated: July 27, 1995


    Personnel data

    Final disposition of disciplinary action

    Former employee

    back to top