My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council Work Session - 12/09/2014
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council Work Session
>
2014
>
Agenda - Council Work Session - 12/09/2014
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2025 4:29:09 PM
Creation date
12/8/2014 9:39:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council Work Session
Document Date
12/09/2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
183
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
indiscriminate disclosure with the right of <br />the public to know what the government is <br />doing. The Act also attempts to balance <br />these rights within a context of effective <br />government operation. The League of <br />Minnesota Cities supports the public policy <br />behind the MGDPA while acknowledging <br />that compliance with the law imposes costs <br />on local taxpayers. Smaller cities struggle <br />with limited staff and resources while larger <br />cities struggle with larger complex <br />databases. The MGDPA must balance the <br />right of citizens to access public data with <br />the cost to municipalities of complying with <br />certain types of information requests. Time <br />spent responding to requests is time that <br />would otherwise be spent performing core <br />city services for city residents. <br />In 2014, the Legislature imposed additional <br />security requirements on political <br />subdivisions in an attempt to prevent <br />unauthorized individuals from accessing <br />private data. Adequate security measures are <br />important, but they make compliance with <br />the MGDPA more difficult and costly. <br />Although the Legislature has made <br />compliance with the MGDPA a priority, <br />funding for the Information and Policy <br />Analysis Division of the Department of <br />Administration (IPAD), the department <br />charged with overseeing the MGDPA, does <br />not reflect the increased need for local <br />government assistance. <br />Cities continue to receive repetitive, overly <br />broad and far-reaching data requests that <br />require significant staff time to locate <br />government records, redact private data or <br />data unrelated to the request, and assemble <br />documents to be provided in order to <br />comply with requirements to provide access <br />to public government data. The MGDPA <br />limits the ability of cities to be reimbursed <br />for responding to requests. <br />For example, cities are limited to charging <br />only 25-cents per page for copies of police <br />motor vehicle incident reports, which does <br />not cover the city cost for copying, while the <br />commissioner of public safety is exempt <br />from this restriction —thereby permitting the <br />Department of Public Safety to continue to <br />charge $5 for incident reports that cities are <br />required to submit to the department. <br />Response: As the cost of complying with <br />the MGDPA increases, the Legislature <br />should provide additional funding to <br />assist political subdivisions meet the <br />increasing complexity of managing <br />government data. <br />The Legislature should allow political <br />subdivisions to charge for the staff time <br />that is required to comply with wide- <br />ranging data requests regardless of <br />whether copies of the data are requested. <br />In addition, the Legislature should <br />provide a mechanism that would permit <br />cities to challenge whether a data request <br />is reasonable and made in good faith. <br />The Legislature should allow political <br />subdivisions to charge the same amount <br />for copies of motor vehicle incident <br />reports issued by local police and fire <br />departments as the commissioner of <br />public safety. <br />The League of Minnesota Cities opposes <br />further increases in the maximum <br />exemplary damages that courts may <br />impose against government entities, <br />including cities, found to have violated the <br />MGDPA; further increases in the <br />maximum civil penalty that may be <br />imposed when a court order is issued to <br />compel a government entity to comply <br />with MGDPA; or any statutory change <br />that would make it a mandatory civil <br />penalty to compel compliance under the <br />MGDPA. The League opposes repeal of <br />League of Minnesota Cities <br />2015 City Policies Page 86 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.