To return to this list after selecting an opinion, click on the "View entire list" link above the opinion title.
November 16, 1999; Minnesota Department of Corrections
11/16/1999 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 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 classified as not public, are available for public access. On September 7, 1999, IPA received a letter from Joseph Ayuyu. In this letter, Mr. Ayuyu asked the Commissioner to issue an advisory opinion regarding his rights to gain access to certain data maintained by the Minnesota Department of Corrections (DOC.) Mr. Ayuyu's request required clarification with IPA staff. In response to Mr. Ayuyu's request, IPA, on behalf of the Commissioner, wrote to Sheryl Ramstad Hvass, Commissioner of DOC. The purposes of this letter, dated October 1, 1999, were to inform her of Mr. Ayuyu's request and to ask her to provide information or support for DOC's position. On October 6, 1999, IPA received a response from Commissioner Ramstad Hvass. A summary of the facts of this matter follows. Mr. Ayuyu is an inmate at Corrections Corporation of America-Prairie Correctional Facility (CCA-PCF.) According to Mr. Ayuyu, he wrote two letters to Commissioner Ramstad Hvass, in which he requested access and inspection of policies and procedures adopted by the Commissioner establishing the minimum standards relating to custody, supervision, care treatment, programs, health, safety, and classification of inmates at [CCA-PCF]. Mr. Ayuyu did not provide the Commissioner with copies of his requests to Commissioner Ramstad Hvass. Greg Carlson, a DOC inspector, responded to Mr. Ayuyu's requests on behalf of Commissioner Ramstad Hvass. In letters dated August 2, 1999, and August 12, 1999, Mr. Carlson told Mr. Ayuyu that a policy manual that is utilized to operate [CCA-PCF] should be in the law library for your use. Mr. Carlson also stated: [i]t is CCA-PCF policy to not allow inmates to have knowledge of certain specified policies for operational and security reasons. They have previously indicated to me that there is a Table of Contents available that lists those policies that are available to you. This is within their scope of authority to make the decision to provide you only limited access. Mr. Carlson also wrote to Mr. Ayuyu: [i]n reference to the rules that are utilized to license the facility [DOC] agreed to allow CCA-PCF to seek American Correctional Association (ACA) accreditation and use the standards as defined in the ACA Standards for Adult Correctional Institutions 3rd Edition' as the basis to meet this requirement. . . . . A copy of these standards is also available for your review in the PCF library. In her response to the Commissioner of Administration, Commissioner Ramstad Hvass stated: It is also the policy of CCA-PCF to allow inmates only limited access to those policies which are utilized for the management/operation of the facility. Sound correctional practice dictates that many policies are not accessible to inmates for safety and security reasons. In summary, Mr. Ayuyu has access to the minimum standards adopted by the commissioner and limited access to operating policies of CCA-PCF. As such, the DOC responded properly to Mr. Ayuyu in that he was provided with information and direction on how to answer his question. It should also be noted that CCA-PCF is a private business and not a governmental agency. Issue:In his request for an opinion, Mr. Ayuyu asked the Commissioner to address the following issue:
Discussion:Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.03, government data are presumed to be public unless otherwise classified under state or federal law. Upon request, a responsible authority must provide for inspection and copying of public government data at reasonable times and places. (See section 13.03, subdivision 3(a).) In response to Mr. Ayuyu's request, DOC referred him to information located in the CCA-PCF library. Under usual circumstances, that would not be an acceptable response per the requirements of Chapter 13. However, in this case, the requestor is confined to a correctional facility. Therefore, it is reasonable for DOC to refer him to the reference materials containing the data, which, in this case, are located at the prison library. Mr. Ayuyu was told that some of CCA-PCF's policies were not accessible to him, for safety and security reasons. DOC did not cite a specific legal basis for that position, but said that it was within the scope of CCA-PCF's authority to make that determination. Commissioner Ramstad Hvass noted that CCA-PCF is a private business, not a government entity. However, if Mr. Ayuyu asked Commissioner Ramstad Hvass to provide the specific legal basis for denying access to some of the data he requested, she should have done so under the requirements of section 13.03, subdivision 3 (e). Depending upon the terms of the contract under which CCA-PCF provides correctional services to DOC, CCA-PCF itself may be required to comply with Chapter 13 requirements. In general, private enterprises such as CCA-PCF are not subject to Chapter 13. However, if a private person has a contractual relationship with a government entity, there are certain situations in which the private entity itself, or the data created/collected by the private entity as part of fulfilling its contractual obligations, may be subject to Chapter 13. Several provisions in Chapter 13 address specific situations involving government entities and parties they contract with. (See sections 13.02, subdivision 11; 13.05, subdivision 6; 13.35; and 13.46, subdivision 5.) Also, the standard State of Minnesota purchase agreement makes data generated under the contract subject of Chapter 13. It should also be noted that the 1999 Minnesota Legislature amended Chapter 13 to require that certain language be part of any contracts entered into between government entities and private persons. The new language, which is codified at section 13.05, subdivision 11, went into effect on August 1, 1999, and provides that when a government entity enters into a contract with a private person to perform any of its functions, the terms of the contract shall state explicitly that all of the data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the private person in performing those functions are subject to the requirements of Chapter 13, and that the private person must comply with those requirements as if it were a government entity. Opinion:Based on the facts and information provided, my opinion on the issue raised by Mr. Ayuyu is as follows:
Signed:
David F. Fisher
Dated: November 16, 1999 |
Inspection
Reasonable time and place (1205.0300, subp. 3)
