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 - 3 of 3
Advisory Opinion 21-002
January 13, 2021; ISD 197, West St. Paul-Mendota Heights-Eagan Area Schools
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 member of the public made a data request to a school district. She requested a copy of the recording of a school district open meeting. The school district denied access to the recording, indicating the recording contained discussions of allegations against school district personnel. The Commissioner could not determine whether the school district properly responded to the public data request because there was a factual dispute as to the purpose for the school district’s maintenance of the recording, and whether the school district maintained more than one copy of the recording for separate purposes.
Category: Open Meeting Law, Records management/retention, Personnel data
Keywords: Open Meeting Law, Records management/retention, Personnel data, Recording meetings, Record of meeting, Open Meeting Law, Open meeting, Public comments
Commissioner: Lenora Madigan Deputy
Advisory Opinion 14-015
October 23, 2014; City of Crystal
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 member of the public asked
whether a city council’s conduct under the OML
was proper on eight different occasions. The
council’s “work sessions” were special, not regular
meetings, but the Commissioner could not
determine whether the council complied with the
special meeting notice requirements under section
13D.04, or held an improper meeting via email. The
council did not properly close meetings and
discussed impermissible topics in closed session,
per section 13D.01, subdivision 3, and section
13D.05. The council also improperly excluded
members of the public who were not disruptive. It
did not comply with section 13D.05, subdivision 3
(a), because it did not provide the required
summary of a performance evaluation. It did not
comply with section 13D.01, subdivision 6, because
a public copy of members’ materials was not
available.
Category: Open Meeting Law, Meeting notice, Closed meetings
Keywords: Open Meeting Law, Meeting notice, Closed meetings, Attorney-client privilege, Email, Meeting calendar, Closed meetings, Statement on record, Notice, Special meeting notice, Public comments
Commissioner: Matthew Massman Acting
Advisory Opinion 12-001
January 12, 2012; School District 47 (Sauk Rapids-Rice)
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: An individual asked if a school district
violated the Open Meeting Law (OML) when it
conducted an open meeting (a 15-minute presentation
by the superintendent with a quorum of school board
members present) then broke in to small discussion
groups where the board members were in separate
locations and could not hear and/or see one another.
The Commissioner concluded that a quorum of the full
body did not participate in any of those discussions
and therefore the board did not violate the OML.
The Commissioner also acknowledged the requester’s
concern that the Board violated a purpose of the OML
as articulated by the Minnesota Supreme Court, i.e.,
“to afford the public an opportunity to present its
views to the [public body].” Prior Lake American v.
Mader, 642 N.W.2d 729, 735 (Minn. 2002). However,
the OML does not provide the public with the right to
speak at a public meeting.
In addition, the requester asserted that the board
violated the OML because it did not create meeting
minutes. The Commissioner noted that the OML does
not require a public body to do so.
Category: Open Meeting Law
Keywords: Open Meeting Law, Interpretation of meeting, Public comments
Commissioner: Spencer Cronk