Agenda - Council Work Session - 12/09/2014

Home

to report a student who possesses an unlawful firearm to law enforcement or the juvenile justice system. But schools are not allowed to release the name of a student in dangerous weapon reports involving use or possession of such weapons that are made to the Minnesota Department of Education. Response: Minn. Stat. § 13.32 should be clarified to allow local law enforcement agencies to work with school officials to jointly make the determination that an emergency or risk of harm exists in order to enable police enforcement actions to be taken in a timely manner. DP-4. Disclosure of Victim Data Issue: Under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA), the name and address of a victim or casualty of an accident or incident to which a law enforcement agency responds is public government data. In addition, the name and location of the health care facility to which victims or casualties are taken is public government data. The MGDPA allows for a crime victim to prevent the disclosure of public data, but no such provision exists for accident victims. Accident victims and their families can be traumatized by the events that caused their injuries. Publicly disclosing their identities and the location where they are receiving medical care places a burden on families and victims who may be questioned by reporters, solicited by lawyers, and contacted by other members of the community. While there are legitimate public policy reasons to make this information public, the MGDPA provides no discretion for city officials and law enforcement to temporarily withhold victim data when releasing it is not in the best interest of the victims. This not only makes the initial period of recovery more difficult for victims, but erodes the trust between victims and state and local government. Response: The Legislature should amend Minn. Stat. § 13.82 to temporarily prohibit the disclosure of victim data if the victim or victim's family specifically requests not to be identified publicly, and the agency or local government reasonably determines that access to the data would cause emotional or physical harm to the individual or otherwise impede the individual's recovery. DP-5. Open Meeting Law Issue: The Open Meeting Laws allows certain meetings to be held using interactive television provided that: all members of the body can hear and see one another and all discussion and testimony; members of the public can see and hear all discussion, testimony, and votes; at least one member of the body is physically present at the regular meeting location; and each remote location is open and accessible to the public. The Information and Policy Analysis Division (IPAD) issued an advisory opinion (13-009) that allowed a city's use of Skype to conduct a remote meeting under Minn. Stat. § 13.02, subd. 1. IPAD applied a "common sense" approach to technology questions, which recognizes the difficulty cities must face when interpreting the Open Meeting Law in light of ever -changing technology. The Open Meeting Law also allows certain state bodies to conduct meetings via telephone and other electronic means, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 13D.015. This useful tool should be expanded to local government to assure that members can attend meetings remotely if attendance at the regular meeting site is not possible. In order to ensure maximum public access, the Legislature should require that such meetings be allowed only if a quorum of members of the body is present at the regular meeting location. League of Minnesota Cities 2015 City Policies Page 88