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 38
Advisory Opinion 25-004
June 9, 2025; City of Chaska
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued under Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2024). It is based on the facts and information available ...
Description: A City asked whether Minnesota Statutes, section 13.685 classifies data about a future municipal electric utility customer. The Commissioner determined that an individual or entity is a customer of the municipal electric utility if it has purchased or has a contract or agreement to purchase electric utility services from the municipal electric utility. As a result, a future municipal electric utility customer is not a customer for purposes of section 13.685, and data about the future customer are presumptively public.
Category: Government Data
Keywords: Government Data, Municipal utility customer data, Classification of data
Commissioner: Tamar Gronvall
Advisory Opinion 22-006
August 9, 2022; City of Two Harbors
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2021). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A city asked whether data it collected, created, and maintained pursuant to a contract with a private entity were government data, subject to the Data Practices Act. The Commissioner opined that the data were government data because the data met the definition of government data in Minnesota Statutes, section 13.02, subdivision 7 and the city’s financial director administered the data as part of her work for the city. The Commissioner further advised that the data were public unless the city could identify a state statute or federal law that classified the data as not public.
Category: Government Data
Keywords: Government Data, Classification of data
Commissioner: Alice Roberts-Davis
Advisory Opinion 21-007
November 29, 2021; City of Golden Valley
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2020). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A city asked the Commissioner whether data in a recording made by an employee on a personal device and uploaded to the city’s computer system was government data, subject to the Data Practices Act. If so, the city asked how such data were classified. In reviewing its own policies, the city determined that the storage of the data on government computer systems did not fall within the employee’s limited ability to use city technology for personal reasons. As a result, the Commissioner agreed with the city’s assessment that the data were government data. The Commissioner also opined that any data in the recording in which an employee is an identifiable subject are personnel data classified by Minnesota Statutes, section 13.43, and any other data that are not on individuals are presumptively public unless classified by another law.
Category: Personnel data, Personal data/devices
Keywords: Personnel data, Personal data/devices, Government data
Commissioner: Alice Roberts-Davis
Advisory Opinion 20-006
September 29, 2020; City of Savage
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2019). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: The City of Savage requested an advisory opinion regarding the classification of email addresses it collected to notify the public of information to participate in a town hall event. The Commissioner opined that the plain language of Minnesota Statutes, section 13.356, paragraph (a) classified the email addresses as private data because the City collected the data for the purpose of notifying residents of how to attend the virtual town hall event. The Commissioner also noted that any other registration data the City collected from individuals not listed in section 13.356 would be presumptively public.
Category: Electronic data, Government Data
Keywords: Electronic data, Government Data, Email addresses
Commissioner: Lenora Madigan Deputy
Advisory Opinion 19-013
November 27, 2019; Rice 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: a data requester asked if a County had responded appropriately to two requests she made for public data. The Commissioner opined that the County responded appropriately to a request for public comments when it emailed the requester a link to the comments, which the requester had previously said would be acceptable. The County did not respond appropriately to a draft spreadsheet when it did not respond to the request promptly and appropriately, did not provide the data in the format in which it was maintained, and failed to assess a reasonable, actual copy cost; the county quoted five different costs and used two different pay scales to calculate costs.
Category: Response to data requests, Requests for data, Copy costs
Keywords: Response to data requests, Requests for data, Copy costs, Copy costs, Timeliness of response to public - prompt, reasonable time (13.03, subd. 2), (1205.0300), To responsible authority or designated person, required, Actual cost - public, Costs, Data access policy, Data does not exist, Data do not exist, Data request policy, Data requests, Designee, Government data
Commissioner: Alice Roberts-Davis
Advisory Opinion 19-010
June 18, 2019; Minnesota Department of Health
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: In Advisory Opinion 19-010, a member of the public asked whether a state agency had violated the Data Practices Act because it had not provided her with access to the data he requested (public personnel data on two employees) until eight months after she asked for the data. In previous advisory opinions, the Commissioner has stated that a prompt, reasonable response is relative to the volume of data requested. Here, she opined that given the facts of this specific data request, including the type and amount of data requested, the agency’s response was not timely.
Category: Requests for data, Response to data requests
Keywords: Requests for data, Response to data requests, Untimely, generally, Multiple data subjects, Timeliness of response to public - prompt, reasonable time (13.03, subd. 2), (1205.0300), Responsible authority duties, Responsible authority (RA), Responsible authority, Response to data request, Requestor responsibility, Request for data, Inappropriate response, generally, Government data, Department of Health data, Data request vs. question/inquiry, Data request policy, Request for data
Commissioner: Alice Roberts-Davis
Advisory Opinion 19-007
May 20, 2019; Houston County Agricultural Society
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: A member of the public asked whether the Houston County Agricultural Society (“Society”) is subject to both the Data Practices Act and the Open Meeting Law. The Society conceded it is subject to the Open Meeting Law, but disputed that it is a government entity for purposes of the Data Practices Act. The Commissioner opined that the Society is subject to the Data Practices Act, as it is a political subdivision as defined by Minnesota Statutes, section 13.02, subd. 11. The Commissioner noted that it is the governing body of the Society that is subject to the Open Meeting Law.
Category: Open Meeting Law, Response to data requests, Statutory responsibilities government
Keywords: Open Meeting Law, Response to data requests, Statutory responsibilities government, Government data, Entities subject to, Open Meeting Law, Agriculture
Commissioner: Alice Roberts-Davis
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 12-019
December 11, 2012; Duluth Airport Authority
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: An entity asked whether
communications sent by its board members from their
personal accounts and equipment were government
data and if so, how those data were classified. When
the board members were acting in their official
capacity in calling, emailing, or writing, the data were
government data subject to Chapter 13. The
communications are classified as public under the
general presumption, and residential address and
email or telephone number are public data as well,
pursuant to section 13.601, subd. 3(b), as well.
Category: Personnel data
Keywords: Personnel data, Government data (13.02, subd. 7), Personal email, phone account - business use
Commissioner: Spencer Cronk
Advisory Opinion 09-010
May 6, 2009; Cook County
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: Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, what is the classification of the following data: financial information (including tax returns) submitted to Cook County by responders to a request for qualifications?
Category: Business Data, Government Data
Keywords: Business Data, Government Data, Business data (13.591)
Commissioner: Dana B. Badgerow