MNSure records to remain public

Posted by: on Aug 27, 2013 | No Comments

The Minnesota Department of Administration recently determined that “marketing data” held by MNSure, the state’s health care exchange, must remain open to review by the public.

In July, MNSure, submitted a request to the department for a temporary data classification that would have converted internal marketing documents to a “nonpublic” status until its marketing plans were publicly released. The change would have closed off access to scores of documents that were presumed to be public, due to MNSure’s status as a taxpayer supported entity.

MNCOGI submitted comments in opposition to MNSure’s application, and noted that MNSure had not met the showing required by Minnesota law to get the data re-classified. On August 22, Commissioner Spencer Cronk agreed with MNCOGI and others, and determined that MNSure’s marketing records must continue to be publicly available.

The National Freedom of Information Coalition 2013 Summit: Get Involved in the Legislative Process

Posted by: on Jun 10, 2013 | No Comments

I attended the National Freedom of Information Coalition  2013 FOI Summit in New Orleans last month.  The NFOIC has posted a wrap-up page with videos of the Saturday panels and the keynote address.

In addition to the presentations on Saturday, panels on Friday afternoon brought together the attendees to talk about nuts-and-bolts issues of running a state freedom of information group, like fund-raising and maintaining a website.  The conversation was informal and part of the aim was to share news of activities in the states.

In the session titled “Yes, You CAN … on a Shoestring,” the speakers were ardent advocates for getting involved in the legislative process.  Across the country there are a few states that hire and pay lobbyists.  Many other states are in a situation similar to Minnesota, where the group is a 501c3 educational group and “lobbying” is only done informally and without pay by members of the groups.  The comments were valuable for both types of situations.

Megan Rhyne, the Executive Director of the Virginia Coalition for Open Government, said that if you want to lobby, you should and you can. The benefits are so much greater than the time you spend in the chambers.  Since the VA Legislature meets only two months each year, most lobbying is done during the interim.   During the session, she makes almost daily trips to walk the halls, meet with legislators, and attend committee hearings to testify or watch.  Some of her most useful conversations and contacts over the years have taken place when she didn’t expect it – in a bathroom washing her hands, or while chatting with lobbyists of other groups that may have similar interests.  Half of lobbying is just showing up. You are not only talking with legislators, but also meeting other stakeholders. Lobbying gives your group a good public relations platform to reach out to donors and constituents.   With information from the capitol you have instant content for your social media outlets.  It gives you a way to get your members involved; you can inform members about what they can do about various issues and bills, and who they should contact.

Lobbying doesn’t always change the outcome of legislation, but sometimes it does.  For many bills, it is helpful to identify citizens who can testify.

Sometimes coalitions can be pigeonholed as just spokespeople for open media issues and for the concerns of journalists – but the coalitions represent more, they represent open government for all citizens.  You are an embodiment of the peoples’ right to know.  Keeping close contact with the media is useful; journalists like to write articles about bills that will affect them directly, and they will be looking for spokespeople.

 Hyde Post, a journalist and consultant from Georgia, said that their group looks at education as a form of long-term lobbying.  Lobbying at the legislature is a form of triage.  Often you are working to prevent the doors of open government from being shut.  How do you prevent that?  Build a basic education workshop that you can transport anywhere.  Make it your business to get in front of newly-elected or newly-appointed public officials, like state court judges, or school board members, or sheriffs, even legislators  School board officials are often those least-savvy about public openness issues, he noted, since many come from the private sector.  If you make contacts with people at an educational seminar and they see you at the Capitol some time later, they will know you, before there is a crisis with a specific bill and you are heading off legislation at the pass.

This is just a small piece of the interesting session.  Another important topic was fund-raising, a crucial aspect of the life of any small nonprofit. Hyde Post from Georgia said that their group began as an organization with $15,000 a year and has grown from there.  “We are always on the precipice of running out of money. If you aren’t worrying about money all the time, I want to meet you, because you probably have a lot of it and I’d like some.”  He also pulled out his phone from his pocket and the small credit card reader that hooks onto it.   He said that everyone in the room needed one.  That way if you are talking with anyone who might have an interest in donating to your group, you are ready to take a donation, then and there.

The Summit was well-run, the speakers were engaging, and my overall reaction was regret that I had not attended the summits in previous years!

Robbie LaFleur

Note to Self: Don’t Get Arrested

Posted by: on Apr 9, 2013 | No Comments

Image from the Twin Cities Daily Planet, of photos in a recent issue of BUSTED.

Overloaded with too many print and online news sources already, I never pick up something to read at my local convenience store.  Maybe that’s why I haven’t kept up with Busted Paper, a newspaper that publishes mugshots from Hennepin, Ramsey, Anoka, and Dakota counties.  Stephanie Fox from the Twin Cities Daily Planet wrote a great article about the issues raised by the Minnesota paper and similar newspapers and websites around the country.  Read “Busted Paper” and other mugshot magazines: Why they are—and will likely remain—legal.

MNCOGI board member Jane Kirtley was quoted in the article.

Mugshots.com includes on its website more than 11,000 words justifying why what they do is moral and legitimate, including strong legal and social arguments about legitimate public interest, open government, even tough love. A lot of people in law and the media agree.

“Many in the criminal justice system are appalled by public access to mugshots in papers and online,” said Jane Kirtley, Silha Professor of Media Ethics and Law at the School of Journalism and Mass Communications at the University of Minnesota.

“Their reaction is to say that it’s an invasion of privacy, there are unintended consequences, that it inflames the public. A lot of the members of the public are appalled, too. People forget that transparency in the criminal justice system is for the protection of the arrested. Secrecy imperils those in custody,” she says. “Public information should be accessible and there should always be a presumption of openness.”

The attitude is similar at the Minnesota ACLU, where executive Director Chuck Samuelson agreed that openness in the criminal justice system is vital for a free society.

“One of the things we had our revolution about in 1776 was secret police work by the government. That’s why we have the Fourth Amendment. Arrests must be public. If they are public, there must be a record of it and the government has to bring you into open court.”

“That’s the good side,” he said. “You don’t want situation like in Argentina. But the bad news is if it’s all public, so is your mugshot.”

Good arguments.  I hope to avoid being arrested, so I can stay out of the Busted Paper and don’t have to pay money to get my image off websites like mugshots.com.

Robbie LaFleur

A Great Keynote at the 2013 Freedom of Information Day Event – Some Notes

Posted by: on Mar 29, 2013 | No Comments

Judge Kathleen Gearin gave a robust argument for allowing the televising of court proceedings in civil and criminal cases in Minnesota, a position developed over the past ten years.  She said her personal experience with cameras in her courtroom has been only positive.  For example, the televised hearings during the 2011 state government shutdown helped the public understand the process.

She noted many reasons that judges and lawyers oppose opening up courtrooms to televised coverage.  Judges are afraid of the unknown, and many are uncomfortable with public speaking.  They are afraid that single sentences may be broadcast out-of-context, that cameras will bring more publicity to cases, and that it will be more difficult for juries.  Judges and attorneys will play to the cameras. Witnesses don’t want to be seen as snitches.  Minnesota has a collegial bench, and some judges don’t want to be considered  oddballs, or “hot dogs.”

To counter those arguments, Judge Gearin said that in practice judges quickly forget that the camera is even there, and the media have been respectful of the privacy of juries and witnesses.  During the question and answer period someone asked whether there is a particular state that allows cameras in the courtroom that would be a good model for Minnesota.  Her matter-of-fact response was that all the states allowing cameras in the courtroom are fine models.

Judge Gearin feels that a successful move to full use of cameras in the courtroom in civil and criminal cases will require broad acceptance in the legal community, and that the legal culture in Minnesota is slowly changing.

I recommend watching all of Judge Gearin’s interesting and thoughtful remarks, available here.

Robbie LaFleur

Send in Your Nomination for the Freedom of Information Award

Posted by: on Feb 18, 2013 | No Comments

MNCOGI is seeking nominations for the annual John R. Finnegan Freedom of Information Award.  Send in your nomination by March 1 for a worthy individual or group or organization working to promote government information and increase transparency.  (form: WORD, pdf)  For inspiration, here is a list of former FOI award recipients.

This week, Ruben Rosario from the Pioneer Press highlighted the work of a prior award winner in “Meet Rich Neumeister, the People’s Activist.”

Rich Neumeister received the FOI Award in 2009.  He still fills his watchdog role at the Capitol, working on his own dime to track data practices and privacy legislation.  The lively profile includes a description of how Rich gained the trust of legislators over the years.

Depending on whom you talk to, Neumeister is an annoying pain in the butt or an indefatigable watchdog who has helped legislators massage laws to better protect privacy rights as well as makegovernment more transparent over the years.  Two straight-shooting and veteran lawmakers I respect attest to the latter.

“Rich is an asset at the Capitol,” said Mary Liz Holberg, R-Lakeville, an eighth-term legislator and member of the House Data Practices subcommittee. “He represents the average citizen and is often battling against the interests of organizations with highly paid lobbyists. He is respectful, knowledgeable and provides a vital perspective on keeping government accountable while protecting individuals’ privacy rights.”

Neumeister said he still has to pass the “weird guy” test annually with rookie lawmakers. That included Rep. Michael Paymar during his early years at the Legislature.

“I wasn’t sure if he was a black-helicopter guy or a good- government guy,” recalled Paymar, DFL-St. Paul. “While his points usually seemed legitimate, he didn’t look like the lobbyists I had been used to dealing with.”

Throughout the years, though, “my respect for Rich grew, in part because of the way he handled himself, but also he really knew what the hell he was talking about, and he understands the intent of the law,” added Paymar, who is serving his ninth term in the House and chairs its Public Safety Finance and Policy committee.

“When a data privacy bill comes up, I wait to hear from Rich.”

An Interview You May Have Missed

Posted by: on Feb 15, 2013 | No Comments

MNCOGI board member and spokesperson Don Gemberling was featured on “Almanac at the Capitol” on January 30. Mary Lahammer’s interview with Don (which begins at 18 minutes, 20 seconds into the program) was part of a segment on data privacy concerns at the Capitol.  Hear Don’s comments about the importance of training in state and local government to avoid privacy breaches. He also mentions the possibility of creating a statewide commission to deal with ongoing complex issues of data practices and government access.

Minnesota lawmakers propose safeguards against misuse of government databases

Posted by: on Jan 24, 2013 | No Comments

http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_22436545/minnesota-lawmakers-propose-safeguards-against-misuse-government-databases

Minnesota lawmakers propose safeguards against misuse of government databases
By Kyle Potter
Associated Press

Updated: 01/23/2013 08:14:37 PM CST

Sens. Scott Dibble, DFL-Minneapolis, and Rep. Mary Liz Holberg, R-Lakeville
A week after more than 5,000 Minnesotans found out that a Department of Natural Resources employee had looked up their driving or motor vehicle records, state lawmakers Wednesday announced their plan to curb abuse of databases.
Sen. Scott Dibble, DFL-Minneapolis, and Rep. Mary Liz Holberg, R-Lakeville, outlined a bill that would require all state and local government agencies to establish better safeguards against database misuse and calls for harsher criminal penalties for violators.
Holberg said the breach at the DNR underscored the need for an overhaul of how government handles its data on Minnesotans.
“We’re just really frustrated that this is continuing to happen,” Holberg said. “This situation has to stop.”
The bill would increase the penalty for repeatedly abusing a database from a misdemeanor to a gross misdemeanor.
It also would require all government entities to post an investigation on the Internet, detailing what data was accessed, how many people were affected and naming who was responsible.
Holberg and Dibble’s bill would apply to local government and law enforcement as well. Current law only governs state agencies.
Investigations have found that misuse of the state driver’s license and motor vehicle database is common. Minneapolis, St. Paul and more than 10 other municipalities have paid out $1 million combined in settlements to a former area police officer who accused other officers of improperly accessing her driver’s license information.
It’s especially troubling that databases are being abused “by public safety employees whom we trust with sensitive information,” Dibble said.
Dibble and Holberg said they’ll consider recommendations from the legislative auditor, who is expected to release a report next month on how law enforcement uses state databases.
“I think everybody recognizes that we don’t have the proper systems and procedures in place,” Holberg said.

Man who was charged after recording deputies has free lawyer

Posted by: on Jan 15, 2013 | No Comments

A private attorney working with the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota has agreed to represent a Little Canada man whose video camera was taken from him by a sheriff’s deputy.

Andrew Henderson, 28, was recording an incident involving a man at his apartment building Oct. 30 when Ramsey County sheriff’s deputy Jacqueline Muellner grabbed the camera.

Henderson was later charged with obstructing legal process and disorderly conduct. He said he was sitting about 30 feet away from the incident. Muellner wrote on the citation that Henderson was interfering with the privacy of the other man, who was being loaded into an ambulance.

Henderson eventually got the camera back, but there was no recording on it. He believes it was deleted.

“A citizen such as Mr. Henderson has an absolute right to be present in a public area, as he was, and to take pictures or to film the surroundings, including police officers that were present,” said Henderson’s attorney, John Lundquist of Fredrikson & Byron in Minneapolis, on Friday, Jan. 11. “And by seizing his camera, they violated in a very dramatic way his First Amendment rights.”

Lundquist is a criminal defense attorney with 30 years experience at his firm.

Chuck Samuelson of the ACLU confirmed that the nonprofit had come to a verbal agreement with Lundquist and Henderson on Friday on Henderson’s representation.

Attorneys with the firm of Kelly & Lemmons, which is prosecuting Henderson on behalf of the city of
Little Canada, did not immediately return phone calls seeking comment Friday.

“We figure that when they’re faced with legitimate legal representation, they’ll say, ‘Oops, our bad,’ and drop the case,” Samuelson said.

Henderson’s next court appearance is scheduled for Jan. 30.
When Muellner took his camera the night of the incident, she told him, “If I end up on YouTube, I’m gonna be upset.”

Henderson told her that what he was doing was legal. He refused to give his name.

But he identified himself when he went to the sheriff’s station the next day to retrieve the camera. He received the citation in the mail a few days after that.

Henderson’s case is similar to others around the country involving citizens recording police activities.

Courts have ruled elsewhere that law enforcement officers have no expectation of privacy when they carry out their duties in a public place.

Ramsey County sheriff’s spokesman Randy Gustafson said Tuesday that it is not the department’s policy to take people’s cameras. People are within their rights to record deputies’ activities, he said.

Henderson said he carries his camera with him and uses it often. Police should be held accountable for their actions, he said.

The deputy wrote on the citation, “While handling a medical/check the welfare (call), (Henderson) was filming it. Data privacy HIPAA violation. Refused to identify self. Had to stop dealing with sit(uation) to deal w/Henderson.”

HIPAA, or the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, deals with how consumers’ health information is handled by health care providers. It does not cover private citizens recording a medical event.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in May ruled that an Illinois law barring audio recording of a conversation without consent of all parties “restricts far more speech than necessary to protect legitimate privacy interests.” As applied in that case, “(the law) likely violates the First Amendment’s free-speech and free-press guarantees,” the court ruled.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined in November to hear the state’s appeal.

In another case, Boston attorney Simon Glik was arrested in 2007 after he used his cellphone to videorecord several police officers roughly arresting another man. The state charged him with violating Massachusetts’ wiretap law; those charges were thrown out.

Glik sued the city of Boston, claiming his arrest constituted a violation of his rights under the First and Fourth Amendments.

The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2011 that Glik was “exercising clearly established First Amendment rights in filming the officers in a public space, and that his clearly established Fourth Amendment rights were violated by his arrest without probable cause.”

The city of Boston paid Glik $170,000.

Emily Gurnon can be reached at 651-228-5522. Follow her at twitter.com/emilygurnon.

COGI-tation on Data Practices issues facing the MN Legislature

Posted by: on Jan 8, 2013 | No Comments

On January 28, 2013, the Minnesota Coalition on Government Information (MNCOGI) will host a public discussion on Data Practices issues facing the 2013 Minnesota Legislature.  The Minnesota Data Practices Act is the state’s chief open government law.
 
Issues to be discussed will include the status of license plate scan data; whether citizen e-mail addresses held by government entities should be public or private; the extent to which personnel data about public officials should be public, the degree to which “criminal intelligence data” should be kept secret, and possible changes to how the Data Practices Act is enforced.

COGI-tations are free, public forums sponsored by the
Minnesota Coalition on Government Information.

Discussion:
Monday, Jan 28, 2013, 2-3:30 pm in MN Capitol Meeting Room 118

Presenter: 
MNCOGI board member Don Gemberling will present MNCOGI’s positions on several issues that will come before the legislature this year.  Mr. Gemberling was the past director of IPAD, the office within the Department of Administration responsible for Data Practices issues.

Questions? Contact: Helen Burke, MNCOGI Board Chair at MNCOGI@gmail.com

​A Look at Cameras in Minnesota Courts

Posted by: on Oct 16, 2012 | No Comments

The Minnesota Supreme Court is allowing cameras to record proceedings in civil cases for a test that runs through June 30, 2013. The Minnesota Coalition on Government Information is hosting a panel discussion to examine this experiment at its halfway point. 

Minnesota news organizations hope that the test will demonstrate that recording equipment does not disrupt court proceedings, and can enhance the public’s understanding of what goes on inside its courts.  They also hope that the experiment will open the door to expanded coverage of criminal court proceedings in Minnesota.

Panel discussion:
Wednesday, Oct. 24,  11am-12:30pm in Room 10 of the State Office Building. 

Panelists include:
Seventh District Assistant Chief Judge John H. Scherer of Stearns County
Ramsey County District Judge Margaret Marrinan
Emily Gurnon, courts reporter for the St. Paul Pioneer Press
Joan Gilbertson, producer for WCCO-TV
David Unze, reporter for the St. Cloud Times

Moderator:  John P. Borger, MNCOGI board member and partner at Faegre Baker Daniels

Minnesota CLE credits are pending approval

Questions?  Contact Helen Burke, MNCOGI Board Chair at mncogi@gmail.com