Advisory Opinion 98-005
February 3, 1998; Minnesota Department of Commerce
Background & Issues
A member of the public asked the Minnesota Department of Commerce for records related to proposed tobacco settlements and litigation. The department initially misdirected the request to the Attorney General's Office by mistake before clarifying the request and providing access to the records. The Commissioner was asked to determine whether the department responded appropriately to the request.
Commissioner Decision
The Commissioner determined that the department erred in its initial response to the data request. However, the department resolved the issue by acknowledging its mistake and promptly making the records available for inspection.
Automated synopsis generated for quick reference only — it has not been reviewed word-for-word against the official record and is not legal advice. Always review the full opinion text below for the Commissioner's actual determination, or see the original document on mn.gov. Think this summary misstates the opinion? Report it.
Excerpted Ruling / ConclusionBased on the facts and information provided, my opinion on the issue raised by Mr. Ravnitzky is as follows:
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, the Minnesota Department of Commerce erred in its initial response to Mr. Ravnitzky's request for access to data. Commerce acknowledged its error and promptly made the data available for Mr. Ravnitzky's inspection.
February 3, 1998; Minnesota Department of Commerce
2/3/1998 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 PIPA and, with the exception of any data classified as not public, are available for public access. On December 11, 1997, PIPA received a letter from Michael J. Ravnitzky. In his letter, Mr. Ravnitzky requested that the Commissioner issue an opinion regarding his rights to gain access to certain data maintained by the Minnesota Department of Commerce. Mr. Ravnitzky enclosed copies of related correspondence. In response to Mr. Ravnitzky's request, PIPA, on behalf of the Commissioner, wrote to David Gruenes, Commissioner of Commerce. The purposes of this letter, dated December 19, 1997, were to inform Commissioner Gruenes of Mr. Ravnitzky's request, and to ask him or the Department's attorney to provide information or support for its position. On December 29, 1997, PIPA received a response from Commissioner Gruenes. A summary of the detailed facts of this matter follows. On December 2, 1997, Mr. Ravnitzky wrote to Commissioner Gruenes, requesting access to inspect certain data maintained by Commerce regarding any proposed national tobacco settlement(s), the impending lawsuit by the State of Minnesota against the tobacco companies, or closely related matters. . . . On December 9, 1997, Mr. Ravnitzky received a response from Pamela J. Eftikides, an investigator in the Enforcement Division of Commerce. In that letter, Ms. Eftikides stated: . . .your inquiry is being referred to the Minnesota Office of the Attorney General for a reply, since we have no authority over this matter. In his response to the Commissioner, Commissioner Gruenes said that Mr. Ravnitzky's request had inadvertently been sent to the Enforcement Division, where it was forwarded to the Attorney General's Office by mistake. The Attorney General's Office recognized the error, and on December 10, 1997, re-referred the request to Commerce. Commerce contacted Mr. Ravnitzky to clarify his request, as it appeared that part of his request was misplaced. One week after clarifying his request, Commerce made the data available for Mr. Ravnitzky's inspection. Issue:In his request for an opinion, Mr. Ravnitzky asked the Commissioner to address the following issue:
Discussion:Commerce at no time indicated that the data Mr. Ravnitzky requested are not public, and that he is not entitled to inspect them. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 13.03, government entities are required to respond to requests for access to public data appropriately and promptly. Commerce was forthright in admitting it had made a mistake in its initial response to Mr. Ravnitzky, which it quickly rectified. Mr. Ravnitzky inspected the data one week after Commerce clarified his request. Opinion:Based on the facts and information provided, my opinion on the issue raised by Mr. Ravnitzky is as follows:
Signed:
Elaine S. Hansen
Dated: February 3, 1998 |