Purpose

This bill amends Minnesota data practices to change how portable recording system data (PRSS data) collected by peace officers are classified and accessed. It broadens when certain PRSS data become public, adds access rights for the next of kin and others after deadly use-of-force incidents, sets timeframes for releasing redacted data, and allows court review of redaction decisions. The overall aim is to increase transparency around officer-involved incidents while balancing privacy and investigative needs.

Main Provisions

• Data classification changes for portable recording system data

  • Normally, PRSS data are private or nonpublic.
  • Some PRSS data are public:
  • Data that record actions and circumstances around (a) firearm discharge by a peace officer in the line of duty when required by law, or (b) use of force by a peace officer causing substantial bodily harm.
  • Data that a subject specifically requests to be public, with redactions for certain limits (see below).
  • Data that are active criminal investigative data stay governed by existing rules; inactive PRSS data follow this section.
  • PRSS data that are public personnel data remain public; other data keep their existing classifications.

• Redaction and disclosure rules for public requests

  • If a non-peace-officer subject requests release, data must be redacted to protect privacy if needed and practicable.
  • The identity of a peace officer protected under law may be redacted when releasing data.

• Post-incident access and timelines

  • When a person dies as a result of a peace officer’s use of force, certain people may inspect all PRSS data (redacted to the extent required by law) within five days:
  • The deceased’s next of kin
  • The deceased’s next of kin’s legal representative
  • The other parent of the deceased’s child
  • Agencies may deny access if releasing data would interfere with an active investigation, but must provide a prompt written denial with reasons and information about seeking relief in district court.
  • If an individual dies as a result of use of force, the agency must release all PRSS data redacted only as required by law no later than 14 days after the incident, unless the chief law enforcement officer states that public classification would interfere with an ongoing investigation, in which case the data remain classified.
  • If the data subject is an elected official charged with a felony, the data become public 14 days after the criminal complaint is filed.
  • Agencies may redact or withhold portions of data that are public if those portions are clearly offensive to common sensibilities.

• Additional legal provisions

  • Section 13.04 subdivision 2 does not apply to PRSS data collection under this subdivision.
  • A person may bring a civil action in district court to:
  • Seek disclosure of data that are private or nonpublic
  • Challenge a redaction or withholding decision for being offensive to common sensibilities
  • The plaintiff must notify the agency and known data subjects; the agency must notify other known subjects.
  • The court may order data released to the public or to the plaintiff, weighing public benefit against potential harms to privacy, public safety, or the data subjects.
  • Data under dispute are examined by the court in camera (private review).
  • This civil process does not affect a criminal defendant’s right to access PRSS data under the Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Key Changes to Law

• Expands public accessibility to PRSS data in specific, high-profile circumstances (firearm discharge, use of force causing substantial harm) and when requested by a data subject.
• Creates a clear, time-bound process for post-incident disclosure to relatives and certain representatives, with strict redaction requirements.
• Introduces a rapid release timeline (14 days) for redacted data after a deadly incident, subject to ongoing investigations.
• Allows public access to data involving elected officials charged with felonies after a defined period (14 days post-complaint).
• Provides a pathway for challenging redactions or classifications through a private civil action, including in-camera court review.
• Permits redaction for content deemed offensive to common sensibilities.

Access, Redaction, and Disclosure Rules (Summary)

• Who can access after death: next of kin, legal representative, other parent of the child.
• When access can be denied: compelling reason that it would interfere with an active investigation.
• How quickly data must be released after death: within 14 days (unless ongoing investigation justifies continued classification).
• When public access applies by request: data described as recording actions around firearm discharge or use of force resulting in substantial bodily harm, with privacy redactions as needed.
• Special protections: redaction of identities for certain protected peace officers; redaction of data not to offend common sensibilities.

Enforcement and Remedies

• Individuals can sue to compel disclosure or challenge redactions.
• Courts may order release, with in-camera review to assess sensitive issues.
• Court balancing test considers public benefit versus potential harms to privacy, law enforcement interests, or subjects’ rights.

Impact on Stakeholders

• Peace officers and agencies: new duties to disclose or withhold data under specified conditions; possible court involvement for disputes.
• Next of kin and data subjects: greater access rights after incidents; defined timelines for review and release.
• The public: potential faster and broader access to certain PRSS data, especially after deadly incidents or involving elected officials.

Practical Considerations

• Balancing transparency with privacy and ongoing investigations.
• Clear timeframes help agencies manage releases and avoid prolonged secrecy.
• In-camera review provides a privacy-preserving mechanism for court determinations.

Relevant Terms - portable recording system data - data classification - private data - nonpublic data - public data - peace officer - discharge of a firearm - use of force - substantial bodily harm - redacted - consent - active criminal investigative data - inactive criminal investigative data - next of kin - legal representative - other parent - compelling reason - ongoing investigation - district court - public personnel data - protected identity - by common sensibilities (offensive to common sensibilities) - in camera - Rules of Criminal Procedure - criminal complaint - elected official - felony - data subject - notify - inspection - disclosure - litigation - civil action