Four years after the smoke cleared from the streets of Minneapolis, questions still linger about how Minnesota’s top officials, including Gov. Tim Walz, handled the protests and riots that erupted in the wake of George Floyd’s death.
Despite a state-commissioned report, crucial interviews and data remain under lock and key, raising the question: What, if anything, is the state trying to hide?
This is the central issue driving a lawsuit filed by Public Record Media (PRM) against the Minnesota Department of Public Safety (DPS). PRM, a Saint Paul-based nonpartisan government transparency organization, says it’s been stonewalled in its attempts to access the full scope of materials used to create the DPS-commissioned report on the state’s response to the 2020 riots.
State contracted Wilder Foundation to assess riot response
The lawsuit centers on a 2021 report by the Amherst H. Wilder Foundation, a Saint Paul nonprofit, which was hired by DPS to assess the state’s handling of the riots.
“The contract that Wilder executed with the Department of Public Safety says that they have to interview people at various levels of government, state, municipal, etc., and look at data from the government to understand what happened,” explained PRM board member Matt Ehling.
The contract then required Wilder to deliver all materials, including interviews and other data reviewed and created under the contract, to DPS.
In August 2022, PRM submitted a data request for these materials, hoping to shed light on the full story behind the state’s response. While the report itself provided some insights, PRM sought access to the underlying materials, particularly the interviews conducted with state officials.
“We put in a request to the Department of Public Safety because the contract says very clearly they own that material and should have it,” Ehling said.
Despite multiple follow-ups, PRM received no response from DPS for over two years, according to the lawsuit.
PRM’s request seeks access to interviews and raw data
As Gov. Walz’s national profile grew—most recently as the vice presidential pick for the Democratic Party—PRM renewed its request, anticipating increased public interest in the materials.
“We asked, ‘Where is the material? Can we have it?’ and then they finally got back to us but claimed they did not have some of the key material that we were asking for, including the raw interview material,” Ehling said.
Legal action taken to enforce transparency obligations
According to Ehling, under Minnesota law and case law interpreting the Data Practices Act, DPS is required to provide the requested material.
“We made that clear to DPS that they own all of this material and control it and should be able to provide it to us,” he added.
When no further response was received, PRM proceeded to court to enforce its rights under the Data Practices Act.
As part of its lawsuit, PRM is asking a judge to force the state to disclose the data, award damages, grant injunctive relief and issue a declaratory judgment for the plaintiff.
“Defendants have failed to perform one or more official duties imposed by law,
including without limitation by failing to obtain, maintain, receive, collect, make, and preserve data responsive to Plaintiff’s Request as required by Minn. Stat. Ch. 13, Minn. Stat. § 15.17, and the Contract,” the lawsuit says. “Defendants have also failed to produce such data to Plaintiff in violation of the [Minnesota Government Data Practices Act].”
Jenna Gloeb
Jenna Gloeb is an Edward R. Murrow Award-winning journalist, media producer, public speaker, and screenwriter. Most recently, she worked as a reporter and on-air host for CCX Media. Jenna is a Minnesota native and resides in the Twin Cities with her husband, son, daughter, and two dogs.
