September 12, 1995; Lyon County
9/12/1995 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 August 15, 1995, in a letter dated August 8, 1995, PIPA received a letter from M. In the letter, M requested that the Commissioner issue an advisory opinion regarding her/his dispute with Region VIII North Welfare, hereinafter Lyon County, over access to data about her/him maintained by Lyon County. In response to M's request, PIPA, on behalf of the Commissioner, wrote to Frank Moorse, Director of Lyon County Region VIII North Welfare Department. The purposes of this letter, dated August 18, 1995, were to inform Mr. Moorse of M's request, to ask him or Lyon County's attorney to provide information or support for Mr. Moorse's position, and to inform him of the date by which the Commissioner was required to issue this opinion. On August 28, 1995, PIPA received a response, dated August 24, 1995, from Kathryn Keena, Lyon County Attorney. A summary of the detailed facts surrounding this issue is as follows. In the opinion request, M related that s/he had been wrongfully accused of physically assaulting a vulnerable adult. According to M, the Marshall Police Department conducted a criminal investigation but elected not to charge the case. M stated that the Minnesota Department of Human Services, hereinafter DHS, investigated the incident and determined that abuse had occurred. M further stated that s/he believes the allegations to be false and has been attempting to gain access to data that are maintained about her/him by Lyon County. M stated that s/he had made requests to officials in Lyon County for access to data about her/him. M was told by one official that all information would be turned over to the Lyon County Attorney. M related that s/he then made requests to Ms. Keena who gave her/him access to the DHS investigative memorandum and a copy of a Marshall Police Department report. According to M, when s/he requested access to all other data about her/him, Ms. Keena advised M that she would not release any other information unless she was ordered to release it pursuant to a court order. M related that s/he then made a request to Mr. Moorse. Mr. Moorse advised M that another employee would provide M with all necessary information. M stated that s/he has not received any documentation from anyone after receiving Mr. Moorse's assurances. In Ms. Keena's August 24, 1995, letter, she stated that a report of maltreatment by M was received by Lyon County. An investigation was conducted by the DHS and a criminal investigation was conducted by the Marshall Police Department. Ms. Keena related that an investigative memorandum (which she enclosed in her letter to PIPA) was generated as a result of the DHS's investigation. She noted that the memo was prepared and is public in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 626.557, subdivision 12. Ms. Keena stated that M was provided with a copy of said memo. Ms. Keena further stated, The only other document that the Region VIII North Welfare Department has in its possession that [M] does not have is the intake form used by the department when the initial report was made. That form has not been released to [M] because it identifies the reporter. In numerous discussions with [M], [s/he] seems to think that there are case notes and other memoranda prepared by a [social worker] in regard to the case. [M] indicated to me that it was this information [s/he] was attempting to gain access to. There are no such documents in existence and I have previously informed [M] of that fact.
Issue:
In the request for an opinion, M asked the Commissioner to address the following issue:
Discussion:
Given that M has been investigated for an allegation of maltreatment of a vulnerable adult, data about her/him has been collected by at least three government entities: Lyon County, the DHS, and the City of Marshall Police Department. The focus of this opinion, however, will be on data maintained by Lyon County. While it appears M has had some contact with each of the other entities, s/he may wish to make a request for access to data to both the responsible authority of the Marshall Police Department and the DHS, if s/he has not already done so.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, individuals have the right to gain access to public and private data maintained about them by government entities. (See Sections 13.02, subdivisions 12 and 15; 13.03; and 13.04.) In addition, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 626.557, when a licensing agency has completed an investigation, any data collected and maintained in the course of that investigation are private data on individuals, and accessible to the subject of the data. (See Section 626.557, subdivision 12.) In the situation at hand, M has requested access to any data maintained about her/him by Lyon County. From Lyon County, s/he has received a copy of the DHS investigative memorandum and a copy of a Marshall Police Department report. Apparently, M believes that additional data about her/him exist. According to Ms. Keena, the only other document in Lyon County's possession that M does not have is the intake form which identifies the reporter of the maltreatment. Also according to Ms. Keena, she has previously informed M that case notes and other memoranda to which M has attempted to gain access, are not in existence. First, Ms. Keena's statement about the intake form which identifies the reporter is somewhat puzzling. While data about the reporter are private data (see Section 626.557) and cannot be disclosed to M, it is possible that some of the data on the intake form are also about M. If there are data about M, and disclosing those data to M would not reveal any data about the reporter, then Lyon County is obligated under both Chapter 13 and Section 626.557 to allow M to gain access to those data. Simply because a portion of the intake form identifies the reporter, it cannot be automatically assumed that the entire form and its contents contain data only about the reporter. If the form also contains data about M, any such data should be provided to M. Second, pursuant to Section 626.557, subdivision 10, a local welfare agency which receives a report of alleged maltreatment is required to, ...investigate and offer emergency and continuing protective social services for purposes of preventing further abuse or neglect and for safeguarding and enhancing the welfare of the abused or neglected vulnerable adult...In performing any of these duties, the local welfare agency shall maintain appropriate records.... Given this requirement in 626.557, it seems somewhat curious that, according to Ms. Keena, Lyon County maintains no other data about M. Third, M somehow seems to be under the impression that Lyon County maintains additional data about her/him. While Ms. Keena asserts she has advised M that no other data exist, it appears M's understanding from both Ms. Keena and Mr. Moorse is different. If the data simply do not exist, it seems that Mr. Moorse could have communicated that fact to M. The Commissioner would like to reiterate that M may wish to contact the responsible authority of both the DHS and the City of Marshall Police Department to determine if either entity is maintaining additional data about M. Opinion:Based on the correspondence in this matter, my opinion on the issue raised by M is as follows:
Signed:
Elaine S. Hansen
Dated: September 12, 1995
|
