01-07-13 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

WS – Item 5 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 5 Date: January 7, 2013 To: City Council From: Jeff Karlson Re: Minnesota Government Data Practices Act Background In a court decision last April, the Court of Appeals held that ele cted council members are not employees under the Minnesota Government Data Privacy Act (MGDPA). In this case, a citizen submitted a data request for the council members’ cell phone records, text messages, and emails. The deputy clerk obtained personal ph one records and redacted them before providing the records to the citizen. The council members sued the city arguing that their cell phone records were private personal data. The MGDPA defines personal data as “government data on individuals maintained b ecause the individual is or was an employee of . . . government entity.” The term employee is not defined by the MGDPA, but the Commissioner of Administration has issued a series of advisory opinions on how to classify elected officials. The Commission er opined that the classification of data about elected officials depends on whether the entity considers the elected official to be an employee. I received a legal opinion from City Attorney Joe Langel who advised that council members are generally not c ity employees under the Minnesota law, but all that would be needed to make that occur would be passage of a resolution. I contacted the League of Minnesota Cities to find out if other cities have designated council members as employees. The League in tur n sent an inquiry to its list serve. Robbinsdale is the only city we’re aware of that classifies council members as employees. Requested Council Direction This is for your consideration. Attachments Draft Resolution