Minnesota law is clear: public data belongs to the public. But there are growing concerns that DHS redactions may be used not just for privacy protection—but to shield system failures and internal inefficiencies.
We need clarity.
#MNLeg #DataPractices
DHS: Can you publicly release the exact redaction rules, internal guidance, and decision-making criteria you use when responding to data requests? Chapter 13 requires justification for every redaction. The public deserves to see the standards being applied.
Redaction must follow statute—not convenience. Over-redaction to hide program errors, financial gaps, or operational missteps would violate the law and undermine public trust. Transparency isn’t optional. It’s a legal obligation.
Another concern: indefinite delays on routine data requests.
Some requests sit for months with no timeline, no explanation, and no progress updates. Under Minnesota law, agencies must respond promptly and provide data as soon as reasonably possible.