The Mankato Free Press editorial, "Fishing expeditions abuse open records law," republished online Nov. 23 (excerpted in print Nov. 29) is misinformed and attacks an enemy that simply does not exist. As the attorney for the Owatonna group misrepresented by the article, I feel compelled to set the record straight.
First, I agree with the uncontroversial premise that creating havoc is not the purpose of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. The Minnesota Legislature made a decision in the 1970s to ensure that the people have access to documents which show what their government is doing.
The courts have clearly stated that there is no "burdensomeness" exception to this law, despite the best efforts of politicians (including anti-transparency school boards) to create one.
To put it bluntly, there is zero evidence to support the Mankato editorial board's demeaning claim that our clients' data request to Owatonna was designed to create havoc. It was not. As our clients stated in a clear response to an Owatonna newspaper's inquiry, they are simply seeking to find out what the school is actually teaching students, and whether that instruction involves problematic elements of critical race theory (CRT) and its ideological counterparts.
If Owatonna were truly not teaching CRT, and if there were no real concern that teachers within the district are doing so, the data request would have yielded few, if any, results. That is what one might expect, given the tired and misleading mantra repeated by school boards and superintendents across Minnesota that CRT is not being taught.
Instead, our request yielded a massive trove of documents mentioning our keywords which our clients have taken time from their busy lives to sort through.
The Mankato editorial board also appears totally unaware that, after the initial request was made, I personally, on behalf of our clients, narrowed the request to make it less burdensome, despite having no obligation to do so. Based on the number of hits per term, we recognized that some terms were bringing in likely unnecessary data, and we reduced the request to 19 keyword terms. We worked with the district to make it more manageable for them and better for us.
It is telling that the district failed to inform the Mankato editorial board of that important fact.