Happy New — Data Practices — Year!

Get highlights from advisory opinions issued in 2023 related to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and Open Meeting Law.

Cities and other government entities across the state continue to see many complex data requests. When an entity or individual is unsure of — or unhappy with — the response of government, they may request an opinion. The Minnesota Department of Administration with the Data Practices Office has the authority to issue nonbinding opinions related to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA) and Open Meeting Law (OML).

Summaries of 2023 advisory opinions

The following highlights from 2023 advisory opinions are of interest to cities: 

• Joint powers entities are subject to the MGDPA and regardless of the volume of data, reliance upon contractors to assist with data retrieval, or the need for legal review and redaction, there is no exception to the maximum 10-business day response time required for requests by data subjects. See Advisory Opinion 23-001
• An entity’s responsible authority must prepare “an inventory containing the authority’s name, title, address, and a description of each category of record, file, or process relating to private or confidential data on individuals maintained by the authority’s government entity.” This data inventory must be updated annually and made available to the public. See Advisory Opinion 23-002
• When a public body holds a special meeting, its actions are strictly limited to topics included in the special meeting notice so the public can be informed of the full purpose of the meeting. See Advisory Opinion 23-003
• A meeting must be closed to discuss allegations or charges against an employee, but once it is determined that discipline may be warranted, subsequent meetings or hearings must be open to the public. See Advisory Opinion 23-004
• A public body cannot close a meeting for attorney-client privilege purposes when there is no threatened or pending litigation. When determining whether the attorney-client privilege exception to the OML applies, the courts balance the purposes served by this privilege against the public’s right to know — the exception applies when the balancing dictates the need for absolute confidentiality. See Advisory Opinion 23-005

Learn more and access additional advisory opinions issued by the Minnesota Department of Administration.

Read more news articles.