May 17, 2004; School District 11 (Anoka-Hennepin)
5/17/2004 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:On April 21, 2004, IPAD received a letter, dated same, from X. In his/her letter, X asked the Commissioner to issue an advisory opinion regarding his/her access to data that Independent School District 11, Anoka-Hennepin, maintains. In response to X's request, IPAD, on behalf of the Commissioner, wrote to Roger Giroux, the District's superintendent. The purposes of this letter, dated April 23, 2004, were to inform him of X's request and to ask him to provide information or support for the District's position. On May 5, 2004, IPAD received a response, dated same, from Paul Cady, the District's legal counsel. A summary of the facts is as follows. In a letter dated March 9, 2004, X asked for copies of certain data relating to his/her child. In a letter dated April 2, 2004, X clarified his/her March 9, 2004, data request. In a letter dated March 13, 2004, X requested a brief summary of certain data relating to his/her child. In a letter dated April 2, 2004, X clarified his/her March 13, 2004, request. In his/her opinion request, X stated that in regard to both of the April 2, 2004, requests, s/he had not received any response of any kind. X attached to his/her opinion request a document X described as a fax confirmation. X indicated the fax confirmation shows that [the District] received [the requests]. The Commissioner notes that he is unable to determine, with certainty, whether this document demonstrates that the District received the April 2, 2004, requests on April 2, 2004. Issues:In X's request for an opinion, s/he asked the Commissioner to address the following issues:
Discussion:Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.04, when an individual requests access to data of which s/he is the subject, the government entity is required to respond within ten working days. In his comments to the Commissioner, Mr. Cady wrote: For your information, and notwithstanding [X's] submission verifying that faxes were delivered to the District, the District does not have the April 2, 2004 requests for data which are the subject of this opinion request.... For your information, please be advised that on May 3, 2004, following receipt of the request for the instant opinion, the District promptly responded to the data requests. Mr. Cady states that the District does not have the April 2, 2004, data requests. X states that s/he faxed the requests to the District on April 2, 2004. The Commissioner cannot resolve this dispute. If the District did receive the requests on April 2, 2004, and did not respond until May 3, 2004, its response was not timely. If the District did not receive the data requests, it was not under any obligation to provide the data. The following note is in order. Upon examination of the District's May 3, 2004, letter to X, it is not clear whether the District did respond to the April 2, 2004, data requests. If the District has not, it should do so promptly. Opinion:Based on the facts and information provided, my opinion on the issues that X raised is as follows:
Signed:
Brian J. Lamb
Dated: May 17, 2004 |
