Search Opinions
Browse Opinions by Date
Request an Opinion
Our Role
Help with searching
For a Topic Search use terms suggested on our Topics page. Please note that clicking the "Browse Topics" link on the Search Opinions tab will take you away from the search page to a different page, which will lose any existing search results or data that has been entered into search boxes. If you plan to search by topic, we recommend selecting your topic first, and complete any additional fields in the search form after that.
For a simple search, type a few words or a phrase in the Full Text search box, then hit Enter or click the Search button. Your search query can be a single word, multiple words separated by spaces, or it can use more advanced syntax described in the FAQ below. Try to use words that are likely to be unique to the content you're looking for.
Note: For best results when searching for a particular citation, spell out the section and subdivision. For example, “13.43, subdivision 4.”
About Search Results
The advisory opinion library currently includes:
- Data practices advisory opinions issued by the Commissioner of Administration from 1993 to the present.
- Open Meeting Law advisory opinions issued by the Commissioner of Administration from 2003 to the present.
The Commissioner's authority is found in Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072. Opinions are nonbinding, but a court may give them deference in a court action. Parties to a court action that act in conformity with an advisory opinion are not liable for certain damages or attorneys fees.
A written, numbered, and published opinion issued by the attorney general shall take precedence over an advisory opinion issued by the Commissioner of Administration.
Results 1 - 10 of 25
Advisory Opinion 24-003
August 6, 2024; ISD 11, Anoka-Hennepin
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2023). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A school district asked whether emails and similar written correspondence regarding school district business that were sent between school board members were classified as private data under Minnesota Statutes, section 13.601, subdivision 2. The Commissioner opined that the private classification under section 13.601, subd. 2 applied to communications between elected officials and members of the public rather than just between elected officials. Additionally, section 13.601, subd. 2 does not apply to elected officials' correspondence when they are communicating in an official capacity. Therefore, school board members' emails are presumptively public unless specific data are classified as not public under another section of the Data Practices Act, other state statute, or federal law.
Category: Elected and appointed officials
Keywords: Elected and appointed officials, 13.601, Correspondence with elected officials, Elected officials
Commissioner: Tamar Gronvall
Advisory Opinion 19-001
January 2, 2019; City of Victoria
Note: The United States Supreme Court discussed issues involving government officials’ social media posts and the public’s First Amendment rights in Lindke ...
Description: A city asked whether it responded appropriately to a data request for information from a Facebook page maintained by the mayor, when it replied to the requester that the information was not government data. The Commissioner opined that the city had responded appropriately because the mayor created and maintained the page outside of his official duties and the city did not collect, create, receive, maintain, or disseminate the information. Thus, the information did not fit within the definition of government data.
Category: Response to data requests, Elected and appointed officials
Keywords: Response to data requests, Elected and appointed officials, Defined, Elected and appointed officials (13.601), Elected officials, Definition - "data collected" interpreted as "data created, received, maintained...", Determination made by entity, Determination by responsible authority, Government data (13.02, subd. 7)
Commissioner: Matthew Massman
Advisory Opinion 18-013
October 16, 2018; St. Louis County
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2018). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: The Star Tribune asked the Commissioner about the classification of correspondence between a County Commissioner and the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC). The Commissioner relied on the reasoning of Advisory Opinion Advisory Opinion 10-023 and opined that the County improperly classified the data as private under Minnesota Statutes, section 13.601, subdivision 2. The private classification of section 13.601 is reserved for communications between elected officials and individuals. The NRCC, as an organization, does not meet the definition of "individual" under the Data Practices Act, but is instead properly categorized as a "person" under Minnesota Statutes, section 13.02. A Kanabec County District Court judge considering the Advisory Opinion subsequently came to the same conclusion as the Commissioner and ordered the County to release the data in question.
Category: Elected and appointed officials
Keywords: Elected and appointed officials, Correspondence with elected officials, 13.055
Commissioner: Matthew Massman
Advisory Opinion 18-008
June 21, 2018; Chisago County
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2017). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A county asked about the classification of an investigative report about an elected county sheriff. The Commissioner agreed with the County that the sheriff was a public official employee and that “retirement” is a form of “resignation.” As such, all data about the complaint became public when the sheriff retired while the complaint was pending, per Minn. Stat. § 13.43, subdivision 2(f) and (e) (excepting not public data about other individuals).
Category: Personnel data
Keywords: Personnel data, Elected officials, Complaint or charge, Public official, Public official · Public personnel data, Elected and appointed officials (13.601)
Commissioner: Matthew Massman
Advisory Opinion 14-019
December 1, 2014; Department of Human Services
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2014). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A state agency asked about its
classification of data determination related to an
internal audit of one of its grantees, including
supporting documentation and other documents
collected as part of the audit. The grantee is a political
subdivision, subject to Chapter 13. The documentation
includes data about employees, members of the public,
and credit card, bank account, and Social Security
numbers. In addition, it includes the grantee’s response
to the internal audit report, copies of the grantee’s audit
reports, and copies of some board minutes. Some of the
data are classified as private pursuant to sections 13.43,
13.355, and 13.37. The remainder of the data in
question are presumptively public, per section 13.03, or
expressly public personnel data under section 13.43.
Category: Elected and appointed officials, Personnel data
Keywords: Elected and appointed officials, Personnel data, Internal audit, Elected and appointed officials (13.601), Personnel data (13.43)
Commissioner: Matthew Massman Acting
Advisory Opinion 14-008
July 11, 2014; Independent School District 833 (South Washington County Schools)
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2013). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A School District planned to fill an
open seat on its school board by appointment. The
media asked for public data about the applicants
under Minnesota Statutes, section 13.601. The
District first responded that the data were private
under Minnesota Statutes, section 13.43, but gave
the data to the media six days after the application
period ended, after the school board approved a
resolution that it no longer considered board
members to be employees. The District’s initial
response was incorrect, but because the District
was obligated to redact private applicant data per
section 13.601, the District’s eventual response was
prompt and reasonable.
Category: Personnel data, Elected and appointed officials
Keywords: Personnel data, Elected and appointed officials, Applicants for appointment to a public body and public body appointees
Commissioner: Spencer Cronk
Advisory Opinion 12-018
December 5, 2012; Independent School District 15 (St. Francis)
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2012). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A member of the public asked whether
an entity improperly released private data about a
board member. At the time it released data to the
public, the entity’s human resources director
considered board members to be entity employees.
The board passed a resolution that members are not
employees six weeks later, and there was no evidence
in the record that the entity had taken any other
affirmative action regarding their employment status
before then. Accordingly, the data were personnel
data about the board member, regardless of any
action to the contrary the board took subsequently.
The entity was obligated to determine the
classification of data before releasing it to the public.
Category: Personnel data, Elected and appointed officials
Keywords: Personnel data, Elected and appointed officials, School board members
Commissioner: Spencer Cronk
Advisory Opinion 12-007
April 20, 2012; City of Emily
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2011). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A city asked about the classification of
certain data it collected and maintained about a candidate
for public office. The candidate submitted an Affidavit of
Candidacy and a copy of her driver’s license as proof of
residency. Both the Affidavit and the copy of the driver’s
license are public pursuant to the general presumption
Category: Elected and appointed officials
Keywords: Elected and appointed officials, Limitation on collection and use of private/confidential data (13.05, subd. 4)
Commissioner: Spencer Cronk
Advisory Opinion 11-019
December 22, 2011; School District 272 (Eden Prairie)
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2011). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A school district asked about the
classification of certain school board correspondence.
Correspondence (email)
sent from one individual
to more than one school
board member, or sent to one board member by more
than one individual, is private data under Minnesota
Statutes, section 13.601, subdivision 2, if neither the
sender(s) nor board member(s) has previously made
the email public. If such an email is classified as private
data, the Commissioner opined that the school district
is not required (in response to a data request) to seek
a decision by the board member(s) or individual(s)
senders as to whether s/he/they choose to make the
email public. If such an email is classified as private
data, it must be released in response to a data request
if one board member or one individual sender chooses
to make it public.
If any sender or recipient has forwarded an email or
shared the contents of an email with a person or entity
(other than the district), the email is public data.
Category: Elected and appointed officials
Keywords: Elected and appointed officials,
Commissioner: Spencer Cronk
Advisory Opinion 11-006
June 8, 2011; School District 834 (Stillwater)
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to section 13.072 of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13 - the Minnesota Government Data ...
Description: Is the email sent to an elected official from a member of the public “government data” under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13?
If the email is not “government data,” can it be classified as “data on individuals?”
If the email is “government data,” is it classified as private data on the individual who sent the email?
If the email is government data and classified as private data on the sender of the email, does the individual who is the subject of the email (the finalist for the superintendent position), have a right to inspect or copy the email upon request and, if so, must the name or other personally identifiable information of the sender be redacted from the email?
Category: Elected and appointed officials
Keywords: Elected and appointed officials, Correspondence with elected officials, 13.601
Commissioner: Spencer Cronk