When MnDOT or another Minnesota government agency is in the middle of an eminent-domain process and has gathered several appraisals of the same property, which of those appraisals become public records when the agency shares one with the landowner, and which stay confidential?
Plain-English summary
Lieutenant Governor Carol Molnau, in her role as Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, asked the AG how the Data Practices Act treats multiple appraisals when MnDOT has more than one in hand and shares only some of them with a property owner during an eminent-domain proceeding.
The background was this: a newspaper reporter had asked MnDOT for all appraisals on certain parcels being acquired. MnDOT gave the reporter the appraisals presented at the commissioner's hearing under Minn. Stat. § 117.085, but withheld the ones it had never used or shared. The reporter then asked the Commissioner of Administration for an opinion. The Commissioner concluded that all appraisals for a parcel become public as soon as any appraisal data is provided to the property owner or presented to the court or commissioners. MnDOT pushed back and asked the AG for a second look.
The AG split the analysis along the structure of Minn. Stat. § 13.44, subd. 3(b), which lists five triggering events that make confidential appraisal data public:
- Exchange of appraisals between negotiating parties (subd. 3(b)(1)).
- Submission of "the data" to a court-appointed condemnation commissioner (subd. 3(b)(2)).
- Presentation of "the data" in court in a condemnation proceeding (subd. 3(b)(3)).
- The parties enter into a purchase-and-sale agreement (subd. 3(b)(4)).
- Submission of "the data" to the owner under § 117.036 (subd. 3(b)(5)).
Clauses (1) and (4) use the broader term "appraisals" without limiting it to a specific document. Clauses (2), (3), and (5) refer specifically to "the data" submitted to a court, commissioner, or owner. That textual difference matters. The AG concluded that:
- Under clauses (1) and (4), all confidential appraisals for that parcel become public when one of those events happens to any single appraisal. The AG agreed with the Commissioner of Administration on this point.
- Under clauses (2), (3), and (5), only the specific appraisal that is "submitted" or "presented" becomes public. Other appraisals the agency holds but did not submit remain confidential.
The opinion also notes that under § 117.036, subd. 2 — the statute governing what an acquiring authority must give a property owner before commencing eminent-domain proceedings — when the agency has obtained more than one appraisal, the legislative intent supports providing all of those appraisals to the owner. The point of the 2003 amendment was to enable agencies to share appraisal data with owners to facilitate negotiated purchases rather than litigation.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 2004. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Historical context: what the AG concluded
Two interpretive paths were possible under § 13.44, subd. 3(b). The Commissioner of Administration's interpretation (which preceded the AG opinion and triggered MnDOT's request) was that all appraisals become public when any one of the listed events occurs with respect to any single appraisal. The opposite interpretation was that only the specific appraisal involved in a triggering event becomes public.
The AG concluded that the statutory text did not support a single, uniform answer. The five clauses differ in their object:
- Clauses (1) ("exchange appraisals") and (4) ("agreement for the purchase and sale of the property") are not limited to a specific document. They describe an event that, once it happens, changes the public-status of all confidential appraisal data for that parcel.
- Clauses (2), (3), and (5) refer to "the data" that are "submitted to a court appointed condemnation commissioner," "presented in court," or "submitted to the owner under section 117.036." Those clauses point to specific data. The AG read them to release only the specific data that was submitted or presented.
On the § 117.036 side, the opinion explains that the 2003 amendment was driven by a practical problem. Senator Don Betzold (the bill author) explained at the April 1, 2003 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing that, under prior law, MnDOT could not give property owners copies of appraisals because the data were confidential. The amendment was meant to enable agencies to share appraisals with owners pre-litigation to encourage negotiated resolutions. The statute requires the acquiring authority to obtain "at least one appraisal" and provide a copy of "the appraisal" to the owner. The opinion observes that when the agency has multiple appraisals, the legislative purpose supports providing all of them to the owner under § 117.036, subd. 2.
The final conclusion harmonizes both readings:
[A]ll appraisal data deemed confidential or protected nonpublic under the provisions of section 13.44, subd. 3(a) becomes public if one of the exceptions set forth in section 13.44, subd. 3(b)(1) or (4) applies to any one appraisal. . . . [A] property appraisal classified as confidential or protected nonpublic by Minn. Stat. § 13.44, subd. 3(a) does not become public under section 13.44, subd. 3(b)(2), (3), or (5) unless that particular appraisal is submitted to a condemnation commissioner; is presented in court in a condemnation proceeding; or is submitted to a landowner pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 117.036.
The opinion expressly does not address how the Rules of Civil Procedure interact with the Data Practices Act during a condemnation. That question is left open.
Common questions
Q: What is the default classification of a government appraisal during an eminent-domain process?
A: Under Minn. Stat. § 13.44, subd. 3(a) as cited in the opinion, estimated or appraised values of individual parcels made by state, agency, or political-subdivision personnel (or by independent appraisers acting for them) for purposes of acquiring or selling land through purchase or condemnation are classified as confidential data on individuals or protected nonpublic data.
Q: What kinds of events make the data public?
A: The opinion lists five triggers under § 13.44, subd. 3(b): (1) exchange of appraisals between negotiating parties; (2) submission to a court-appointed condemnation commissioner; (3) presentation in court in condemnation proceedings; (4) parties enter a purchase-and-sale agreement; (5) submission to the owner under § 117.036.
Q: If MnDOT shares one of three appraisals with the landowner during negotiations, are the other two appraisals public records too?
A: As described in the opinion, yes — if the sharing meets the "negotiating parties exchange appraisals" trigger in subd. 3(b)(1) or the parties enter a purchase agreement under subd. 3(b)(4). Both triggers convert all of the agency's confidential appraisals for that parcel to public.
Q: If MnDOT only shows a single appraisal in court, do the other two become public?
A: As described in the opinion, no. Subd. 3(b)(3) refers only to "the data . . . presented in court" — only the specific appraisal presented becomes public. The other two remain confidential.
Q: What about an appraisal MnDOT obtained, never showed anyone, and never used?
A: Such an appraisal remains confidential or protected nonpublic under subd. 3(a) so long as none of the triggering events has occurred for that specific appraisal or for any other appraisal (under subd. 3(b)(1) or (4)) for the parcel. Once a clause (1) or (4) event occurs, however, the never-used appraisal would also become public.
Q: Can a property owner force the agency to disclose all appraisals it has?
A: The opinion does not address whether the owner can compel disclosure beyond what § 117.036 requires. It does describe the AG's reading of § 117.036, subd. 2(a) as supporting the conclusion that when the agency has more than one appraisal, the legislative intent is to provide all of those appraisals to the owner. Operationally, the owner has standing to challenge the agency's classification through the Commissioner of Administration's advisory-opinion procedure.
Q: Does the opinion address what civil-procedure rules do to the analysis?
A: No. The opinion expressly notes it does not analyze the impact of the Rules of Civil Procedure on appraisal status during a condemnation proceeding.
Q: Could the AG's reading be different today?
A: The opinion analyzes the statutory text as it stood in 2004 (with the Supp. 2003 amendments). The Minnesota Legislature could have amended § 13.44 or § 117.036 since then in ways that change the analysis. Anyone relying on this opinion should check current statutory text and any later AG opinions or court decisions.
Background and statutory framework
Minn. Stat. § 13.44, subd. 3(a) classifies appraisal data made for purposes of acquiring or selling property through purchase or condemnation as confidential data on individuals or protected nonpublic data. The five exceptions in subd. 3(b) are the events that release the confidentiality.
The 2003 amendment that added clause (5) was paired with the enactment of Minn. Stat. § 117.036. Section 117.036, subd. 2(a) requires the acquiring authority, before commencing an eminent-domain proceeding under chapter 117, to obtain at least one appraisal for the property, confer with one or more owners if reasonably possible, and at least 20 days before presenting a petition under § 117.055, provide the owner with a copy of "the appraisal" and inform the owner of the owner's right to obtain their own appraisal.
The mechanism by which a third party (here, a newspaper reporter) seeks an authoritative classification of disputed government data is in Minn. Stat. § 13.072. The Commissioner of Administration issues advisory opinions on Data Practices Act questions. In this case the Commissioner had issued Dept. of Admin, Adv. Op. 04-005 before MnDOT requested the AG's view. The two opinions reach the same conclusion on subd. 3(b)(1) and (4) but diverge on subd. 3(b)(2), (3), and (5).
The opinion is signed by Assistant Attorney General Kenneth E. Raschke, Jr., on behalf of AG Mike Hatch.
Citations and references
Statutes:
- Minn. Stat. § 13.44, subd. 3(a) (2002)
- Minn. Stat. § 13.44, subd. 3(b) (Supp. 2003)
- Minn. Stat. § 117.036, subd. 2 (Supp. 2003)
- Minn. Stat. § 117.055
- Minn. Stat. § 117.085
- Minn. Stat. § 13.072 (Supp. 2003)
Related agency opinions:
- Dept. of Admin, Adv. Op. 04-005 (Commissioner of Administration, Feb. 5, 2004)
Legislative history:
- Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing, April 1, 2003 (statement of Sen. Don Betzold on the 2003 amendment)
Source
- Landing page: https://www.ag.state.mn.us/Office/Opinions/
- Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.mn.us/Office/Opinions/852-20040413.pdf
Original opinion text
GOVERNMENT DATA: PROPERTY APPRAISALS: Data Practices classification of property appraisals done for purposes of acquisition discussed. Minn. Stat. §§ 13.44, 117.036 (Supp. 2003).
852
(Cr. Ref. 817, 851)
April 13, 2004
Carol Molnau
Lt. Governor/Commissioner
Minnesota Department of Transportation
395 John Ireland Boulevard
St. Paul, MN 55155-1899
Dear Commissioner Molnau:
Thank you for your letter dated March 9, 2004.
FACTS AND BACKGROUND
You state that a newspaper reporter recently requested from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) copies of all appraisals held by MnDOT pertaining to certain parcels of property that were in the process of being acquired by MnDOT through eminent domain procedures. The reporter was not an owner of any of the land in question and did not appear to be acting on behalf of any landowner. MnDOT staff provided the reporter access to appraisals that had been presented in a commissioner's hearing held pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 117.085, but did not provide access to appraisals which had not been used in the proceedings or otherwise shared with the property owners. The reporter then sought the opinion of the Commissioner of Administration pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 13.072 (Supp. 2003) as to the appropriate classification of the appraisal data withheld by MnDOT. On February 5, 2004, the Commissioner rendered an opinion to the effect that all MnDOT appraisals pertaining to a parcel of property become public as soon as any appraisal data is provided to the property owner or presented to the court or commissioners in an eminent domain proceeding. Dept. of Admin, Adv. Op. 04-005. Based upon these facts you ask, "If a condemning authority possesses multiple appraisals of a piece of property that is in the process of being condemned and if the condemning authority shares one or more of the appraisals with the landowner, what is the status of the remaining appraisals during the pendency of the condemnation process?"
LAW AND ANALYSIS
- Generally
Minn. Stat. § 13.44, subd. 3(a) (2002) provides:
Subd. 3. Real property; appraisal data. (a) Confidential or protected nonpublic data. Estimated or appraised values of individual parcels of real property which are made by personnel of the state, its agencies and departments, or a political subdivision or by independent appraisers acting for the state, its agencies and departments, or a political subdivision for the purpose of selling or acquiring land through purchase or condemnation are classified as confidential data on individuals or protected nonpublic data.
(Emphasis added.)
Minn. Stat. § 13.44, subd. 3(b) (Supp. 2003), however, provides certain exceptions to the protections offered by paragraph (a):
(b) Public data. The data made confidential or protected nonpublic by the provisions of paragraph (a) shall become public upon the occurrence of any of the following:
(1) the negotiating parties exchange appraisals
(2) the data are submitted to a court appointed condemnation commissioner;
(3) the data are presented in court in condemnation proceedings;
(4) the negotiating parties enter into an agreement for the purchase and sale of the property; or
(5) the data are submitted to the owner under section 117.036.
[Footnote 1: This opinion focuses solely on the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 13.44, subd. 3. It does not attempt to analyze what Rules of Civil Procedure, if any, may impact the status of the appraisals during a condemnation proceeding.]
First, as noted by Commissioner Brian Lamb, the language in Section 13.44, subd. 3 can easily be interpreted in more than one way. First, it can be read in the manner read by the Commissioner where all appraisals become public when any of the triggering events in Section 13.44, subd. 3(b) takes place with respect to any one appraisal. Alternatively, it can be interpreted to mean that only the appraisal that triggers one of the exceptions of Section 13.44, subd. 3(b) becomes public when the triggering event occurs.
- Legislative History
We have attempted to locate the legislative history of Section 13.44, subd. 3 to shed some light on the legislature's intent in enacting the law. Unfortunately, we were unable to locate any information relative to the enactment of the law. We were able to locate some legislative history, however, with respect to the amendment enacted in 2003 which added clause (5) to Section 13.44, subd. 3(b).
During the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on April 1, 2003, the amendment adding clause (5) was discussed. The amendment also proposed enactment of Minn. Stat. § 117.036, which generally requires public authorities to obtain "at least one appraisal" for any property proposed to be acquired through condemnation. Minn. Stat. § 117.036, subd. 2 (Supp. 2003). That section further requires the public authority to provide the property owner with a copy of "the appraisal." The author of the Senate bill, Senator Don Betzold stated that, under the then-current law, the Minnesota Department of Transportation was unable to provide property owners with copies of appraisals because they were considered confidential data. The purpose of the bill was to enable public authorities to share appraisal data with property owners so they could understand the basis of the offer and to hopefully reach an agreement with the acquiring authority without having to resort to litigation. A bill amending Section 13.44, subd. 3(b)(5) and adopting section 117.036 was ultimately enacted by the legislature.
- Minn. Stat. § 13.44, subd. 3(b)(2), (3), and (5)
As noted above, clause (5), as well as clauses (2) and (3), refers to the disclosure of "data" when "the data" are "submitted" or "presented" to specified persons or in specified proceedings. Because the exceptions in these clauses are for data submitted or presented only in certain, specific ways, it appears most reasonable to interpret these clauses to permit public disclosure of only the data that are so "submitted" or "presented". As a result, any data which is not submitted to a court appointed condemnation commissioner, not presented in court, and not submitted to the landowner pursuant to section 117.036 would not become public data.
[Footnote 2: Clause (5) refers only to "the data" . . . submitted to the owners under section 117.036. That section states, in pertinent part:
Before commencing an eminent domain proceeding under this chapter, the acquiring authority must obtain at least one appraisal for the property proposed to be acquired. In making the appraisal, the appraiser must confer with one or more of the owners of the property, if reasonably possible. At least 20 days before presenting a petition under section 117.055, the acquiring authority must provide the owner with a copy of the appraisal and inform the owner of the owner's right to obtain an appraisal under this section.
Minn. Stat. § 117.036, subd. 2(a) (Supp. 2003). As noted, the acquiring authority must obtain "at least one appraisal" and provide a copy of "the appraisal" to the owner. In a case where an acquiring authority obtains more than one appraisal, the statute does not state that only one appraisal must be provided to the landowner. Indeed, the statute is premised on the notion that sharing information before having to litigate a case will hopefully result in a negotiated purchase rather than a condemnation proceeding. Consequently, if more than one appraisal has been obtained by the acquiring authority before providing an appraisal to the owner as required by this section, the apparent legislative intent indicates that all of those appraisals should be provided to the landowner pursuant to section 117.036, subd. 2.]
- Minn. Stat. § 13.44, subd. 3(b)(1) and (4)
Clause (1) states that confidential appraisal data becomes public when "negotiating parties exchange appraisals." Clause (4) provides that such data becomes public when "the negotiating parties enter into an agreement for the purchase or sale of the property." These clauses do not contain the limiting reference to "the data" contained in clauses (2), (3) and (5). Thus, it appears that all government appraisals become public if one is shared with the owner in an exchange of appraisals or if the parties enter into an agreement for the purchase and sale of the property.
CONCLUSION
We agree with the Commissioner of Administration that all appraisal data deemed confidential or protected nonpublic under the provisions of section 13.44, subd. 3(a) becomes public if one of the exceptions set forth in section 13.44, subd. 3(b)(1) or (4) applies to any one appraisal.
It is our further opinion, however, that a property appraisal classified as confidential or protected nonpublic by Minn. Stat. § 13.44, subd. 3(a) does not become public under section 13.44, subd. 3(b)(2), (3), or (5) unless that particular appraisal is submitted to a condemnation commissioner; is presented in court in a condemnation proceeding; or is submitted to a landowner pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 117.036.
Very truly yours,
MIKE HATCH
Attorney General
State of Minnesota
KENNETH E. RASCHKE, JR
Assistant Attorney General
(651) 297-1141 (Voice)
(651) 297-1235 (Fax)
AG: #1199533-v1